Tell me if this school is not discriminating against our president

You will not believe this garbage.

There's a school in Tallahassee which is sending out the e-mail I've posted below (using Leon County e-mail) to all of the parents of the children who attend there (again, parents who have been provided Leon County e-mail addresses), giving them an OPTION of opting out of having to watch OUR PRESIDENT. My question is this, did they do this when we had Bush? I'll bet not. Why is my tax money being used to discriminate against our president?

If any of you would like to write and protest this, please do so. I'm not quite understanding why parents would be given an option of opting out of their kids seeing OUR PRESIDENT. It's sick. If the school has been forced to offer this option, I'd like to know who forced them to. This information needs to come out.


Thank you.


Here it is. I have deleted the e-mail of the person that sent it using the Leon County K-12 e-mail, and the address of the parents of that school, again, using the Leon County K-12 e-mail:



-----Original Message-----
From:
To:
Sent: Wed, Sep 2, 2009 12:48 pm
Subject: National Address by President Obama



PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MESSAGE

President Obama has announced the he will deliver a national address directly to students on the importance of education. This address will be broadcast live at 1:00 PM on Tuesday, September 8, on www.whitehouse.gov. If your family chooses not to participate in this activity, please let your child's teacher know. An alternate activity will be assigned.

And since Bush never addressed all of the nation's schoolchildren, we will never know what would have been condoned.

I don't see the problem - if someone doesn't want their kid watching the President, then why should they have to?

So did Reagan.

You never had this reaction to them.

I'd have had the same reaction: don't want your kids to see it, then don't let them see it.

Was DU up in the Reagan years? What pioneers! Sorry I missed that.

:eyes:

Reasonable to infer that you were addressing me.

:eyes:

Now then: begone.

your inability to admit a simple reading comprehension error is the last straw, goodbye, jerk.

It read the same to me. I guess it's unreasonable that a reply TO YOU that corrects YOUR statement wasn't TO YOU at all ... it was to the general "you" ... or maybe, "some people."

Was the hostility and ire you received as a result of thinking someone posting to you was talking to you... Was that for YOU, or for "some people?" :rofl: This place is a joke sometimes.

in my high school. Presidents who ask for time should get it, it's a pretty long standing practice.

As for the kids with the prissy parents who don't want them watching a president who isn't lily white (the real objection here), I'd suggest their brats will likely be texting under their desks anyway, so they've got nothing to worry about.

It may sound strange that the school is taking the initiative in this by contacting the parents, but there is nothing wrong in giving people the option to participate or not. If it had been Bush, there would be outrage here if pupils were forced to listen to him.
The only thing I don't get is why it's not left to the students to make this decision.

afternoon during football season. Oh well, guess we know what is important.

.

Because students are in school for educational purposes. Even if a parent doesn't want their children to take social studies, and learn about US Presidents, it is part of the core of civics lessons.

...of respect for you, but I disagree with you on this. This speech 'can' be connected to the curriculum, but it's an extra...like a field trip. Parents have rights. These children are under 18. Parental permission is required for the extras, like field trips, sex. ed. and so on.

My earlier post on this:

This is not about discrimination. It is preventative. It's about...
Posted by YvonneCa in General Discussion
Wed Sep 02nd 2009, 02:19 PM
... not getting sued by parents. Anytime a school or district adds something to the school's program, parents have the legal right to be informed and to opt out if they so choose. These are under-age students. The parents have rights. If it's a controversial curriculum or program (or speech), where many parents may have strong feelings, the school or district is legally protecting itself by informing parents and giving them the choice...in advance. It is standard practice by schools, that's all I'm saying.

Maybe a lawsuit would be laughed out of court, but it is not discrimination. It's CYA by the school district, because they know the community in which they live. Keep in mind the heated political environment right now...remember the crazies at the health care town halls? No principal or superintendent wants them showing up in his/her office with irrational complaints...and they WOULD be irrational.

If racism is a factor...and it probably is out there, judging by the town halls...I think it is better to throw water on it (by parental choice) than add a match to it. JMHO.

talking politics- he's talking about the importance of a good education.

How could any thinking peron be opposed to that message???

If a parent is that distressed over their child hearing something the President of the UNITED STATES has to say- which is NOT about 'religion' - i believe they are denying their child an adequate education- because like it or not, our children NEED to learn to listen to our elected leaders, to form their own opinions and USE their OWN minds.

The PROBLEM with so many citizens of this country is that not enough people take the time, and make the effort to actually LISTEN to our officials, they listen to selected sound bites, or other peoples 'take' on what has been said- and think their opinions are based on unbiased reason.... which is a large part of where we are right now.

:shrug:

He IS the POTUS whether you like it or not.
I don't understand this--I really don't.

the president. But I don't know if it's outrageous that they be given the option not to.

I'm conflicted.

Bryant

There was NO opting out.
Participating in history shouldn't be optional while attending a public school.

Actually Reagan spoke at a college near me, I can't remember if I went or not - i think i pretended to go and then went somewhere else.

Bryant

He HURT our family farm with his policies. I have more than an ideological grudge against him, as did my parents. We can't choose the path that history takes, but we should not be sheltered from it.

I admit to being more troubled by teachers who are going to refused to air the broadcast.

Bryant

that on Reagan's Challenger address he included a prayer for the deceased?

You should have not been forced to listen or Reagan. Just as students should be able to opt out of the President's address.

My guess is, virtually none.

It's because the man is a "dirty n----r" or a "damned muslin" to a few locals with influence at the school, is my guess.

NOT Obama! Where has common sense gone? this would never have happened in the stolen Bush years

George W, Bush and Ronald W. Reagan BOTH addressed the nation's school children. Reagan over Challenger and Bush over drugs.

But were there opt-outs for the children? The even sadder thing is that people are calling this speech to kids is socialism.

It was mandatory in most schools. Only schools without television feeds didn't carry it.

I wonder what could cause parents in a southern state to not want their children exposed to Barack Obama speaking?

:think:

One of these pictures is not like the others...

From the pictures, Obama has tied his tie with an overhand knot, while Reagan and Bush appear to have used a modified Windsor. That's what you're referring to, right? I mean, what else could it possibly be?

Note that both Reagan and Bush wear red ties, whereas Obama's is blue.

See, it's all about color.

:eyes:

intercoms, IIRC.

Thanks

BTW, I ask only because I tried to find references to these speeches but haven't been able to do so. I recall Reagan speaking to the nation after the Challenger disaster, but it was in the evening, after school would've been out.

On edit. I found a link to a story about Bush I giving a speech to students. Still nothing for reagan.

it's probably not the most compelling argument.

Following is a link about Reagan. I don't believe George W. did, but his dad did in 1991. I think George W. just went to school for photo-ops.


http://conflictingreports.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/reagan-gave-national-address-to-students-in-1988-broadcast-on-c-span/

That seems to be the rule these days; if one parent complains about anything for any reason the entire class has to be banned from whatever it is.

If my kids had been forced to watch Bush I would have been pissed.

Enough of a hue and cry by a few rightwingers wetting themselves about communist propaganda or whatnot, and entire schools will be prevented from seeing things like this.

...or district adds something (like a new sex ed. or field trip, etc.) to the school's program, parents have the legal right to be informed and to opt out if they so choose. If it's a controversial curriculum or program, where many parents may have strong feelings, the school or district is legally protecting itself by informing parents and giving them the choice...in advance.

It's not about discrimination, it's about not getting sued by parents.

And I think that any suit over this would be laughed out of court.

...district. It is standard practice by schools, that's all I'm saying: "...the school or district is legally protecting itself by informing parents and giving them the choice...in advance."


You may be right that such a lawsuit would be laughed out of court, but it is not discrimination, as the OP suggested.

Can't imagine finding fault with that. :eyes:

the government...any government....to tell you what values you are allowed to pass on to your children? I don't.

for football games? When the President of the United States of America makes a special point of addressing American school children during school hours, it should be a required assembly just the same as the required assemblies for all other school events.

That was 30 years ago in So. Cal.

and 12 guys getting high behind the bleachers?

I was in the band and so I never missed one of the damn things.

It is a speech by the President of The United States.

It is educational, it is newsworthy. The only value system they'd be following to opt out is one of sheer ignorance, fed by many things I won't enumerate here.

That's all that needs enumerating.

Certainly I believe racism is at the crux of this ignorant "rally" to prevent Obama's speech from being shown to students.

But I absolutely do not see how ANY generic motivational speech for students given by ANY POTUS would be against anyone's values?

Was the OP to which I was responding being sarcastic and I missed the point?

I would be pitching the same fit if this were happening under W. Again, providing the speech wasn't about politics nor prayer, the office of POTUS should always have a place in a PUBLIC school.

Reagan and Bush I all had speeches piped in. It seems to me a "given" that POTUS has an open door to simply give a motivational, encouraging speech within the public school system.

If not, take down the flag and stop saying the Pledge. You can't have it both ways.

back to post #36 and you will see how 'values' got brought into the discussion. Maybe 36 was just sarcasm but it didn't really read that way and wasn't smilied...it's actually hard to tell sometimes. Anyhow, my own personal opinion is that if parents don't want their kids listening to the president regardless of who he or she is, they ought to have that right just as they should also be afforded the right to expose them to ANY political (or religious or ethical) viewpoint they think is appropriate.

I guess some people would like to outlaw bigotry...getting rid of it is a laudable goal but punishing citizens for having unpopular or prejudicial opinions is a pretty awful and despicable notion.

How f*cked up is that.

I wouldn't want to live in any country where that wasn't allowed.

The dangers are too many to risk. Some might even become Democrats. Right?
:shrug:

Sure, they may be racists, but they also think all Democrats are pure evil.

Right wingers are whiners who fear anyone, especially their own children, hearing anything not first filtered by FAUX News or Flush or Glenn BecKKK.

I don't blame the administrators who don't want to hear it from these assholes and are giving them the "opt-out", but I do blame the media who has allowed a forum for these fuckfaces to whine and cry if their kid hears something from a Democrat that Roger Ailes didn't rewrite and spin first.

"Opting out" of an address by the President of the United States to public school children is in this particular case racist bullshit disguised as freedom and in general it's libertarian crap.

if I don't like the game, I'll take my marbles and go home.

Civil discourse is what's missing. I don't like the President so I just won't participate. It's disrespectful to say the least.

No matter how much I disagreed with Bush, I still listened, to try to understand.

because whack jobs would be screaming without it. And I see the side that says if it was Bush, what would we think, but jeebus it's just the president telling kids to stay in school, keep to the straight and narrow, beginning of the year pep talk. It's not a big deal.

Florida law may be different. Consult with a Florida attorney.

:dem:

-Laelth

If you can opt out of anything that goes beyond regular classroom time, great. If the school picks and chooses from what they would allow you to opt out of, then I would look at that list of options, and base any decisions on that info.

...of course it is.

Doesn't the OP Know that anything that goes against our President is due to racism??

:eyes:

"Doesn't the OP Know that anything that goes against our President is due to racism??"

I'd like to see an example of something that isn't.

No, that can't possibly be right...what am I missing here?

At least crazy ass "criticism" such as this.

In the absence of a legitimate complaint against Obama, I'll just have to assume the dumbass's true motives.

Because there were plenty of crazy-ass claims against him (He or his wife killed Vince Foster, for one).

I don't know if some of you folks were old enough to remember the years 1992-2000, but THIS IS WHAT REPUBLICANS DO! And we need to remind people of this fact, because Obama is going to fall victim to the same shitstorm Clinton did midway through his first term......a GOP congress who will never allow him to reach the goals he set.

These are the same crowds that rail over Obama's birth certificate. Sell Obama monkey dolls, etc.

These fuckers wouldn't be taking their kids out of school if the president was right.

And I've no idea why you're bothering to defend these shitforbrains scum.

They were pieces of shit back then, and they are pieces of shit now.

You seem to be the one defending them if you think they weren't that bad back then, and they only became assholes because the President is a black man. They always have an excuse for their intolerance of the Democratic party. Starting back in '92 it was because Clinton didn't win 50% of the vote and because he was an adulterer. These are people who tried to spin it that David Koresh was a victim of overbearing government interference, and that maybe Tim McVeigh was just a frustrated patriot who went a little too far.

If Bill Clinton had ever had something like this speech Obama is making, they would have flipped the fuck out too. You don't think so? I had a guy rail at me one day in a bookstore just after Clinton left office because his daughter was being assigned to read a biography of Bill by her teacher. On and on about him being an immoral socialist draft-dodging womanizer who should have been impeached for "ruining America". He said he wasn't going to let her read the book because it would be all lies, and instead was going to have her write an essay about teachers brainwashing students. This is exactly the type of people we are talking about here, and a similar situation. Did Bill get a break from THAT guy because he was white? If Hillary was the CiC, you don't think they'd do it then too? Would that be because they were sexist?

I'm amazed at how ten to fifteen years erodes people's memory.

of color.

...

and Republicans want to make it partisan? That's FUCKED UP! Bush and Reagan both spoke to school chidren in live and taped hook-ups -- and I don't remember it being optional.

The very idea that Republicans are pushing parents in Texas to "opt out" is sooooooo wrong and soooooo obviously racist. I'm appalled once again at the hatefulness of Republicans.

Is there no bottom to the pit of hell in which they are free-falling?

if Obama tries to lead them in prayer.

This is clearly racism. And clearly Republicans are behind it.

... not getting sued by parents. Anytime a school or district adds something to the school's program, parents have the legal right to be informed and to opt out if they so choose. These are under-age students. The parents have rights. If it's a controversial curriculum or program (or speech), where many parents may have strong feelings, the school or district is legally protecting itself by informing parents and giving them the choice...in advance. It is standard practice by schools, that's all I'm saying.

Maybe a lawsuit would be laughed out of court, but it is not discrimination. It's CYA by the school district, because they know the community in which they live. Keep in mind the heated political environment right now...remember the crazies at the health care town halls? No principal or superintendent wants them showing up in his/her office with irrational complaints...and they WOULD be irrational.

If racism is a factor...and it probably is out there, judging by the town halls...I think it is better to throw water on it (by parental choice) than add a match to it. JMHO.

I'm sure the administration know their community, and likely know that there are a bunch of good family-values conservative Christians who would kill the principal (or anyone else in the school system) (in the name of JEEEEZZZZZUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSSSS!), if their kids are "forced" to watch the president of the United States.

Sad that America has devolved to this, but that's the conservative mindset for you.

Why now with Obama?

No way. This is discrimination, pure and simple.

...all my previous posts on this thread were made early in the day. I JUST NOW heard all the news about RW radio being up in arms about this and thinking Obama will 'brainwash' their kids, and Glen Beck saying parents should keep kids home from school. I had NO IDEA the crazies were already out or how they are spinning this.

They are just NUTS. I am glad Obama will speak to kids. As a teacher, I am grateful...he will have an impact. But his impact will be in motivating students who listen to him. THAT is a very good thing.

But, I have to tell you, after seeing on television what the RW crazies are up to, the school administrators are doing their job. They are letting parents make the decision for their children...you can't go wrong there.

If he had, the right-wingers would have kicked and screamed about it. They would have LTTE en masse rambling about the liberal teachers indoctrinating the kids.

If a Republican addresses students, it's an educational moment. If a Democrat does it, it's political.

They are hypocritical scum who only respect the office of the President when a Republican holds it.

I have no doubt the vast majority are racists. But they whine and cry when they are not in charge no matter the race, sex, or religion of the Democrat in power is at the time.

and schools had *refused* to allow parents to opt out their kids, I wonder what the reaction would have been on DU? Let's not forget that a repub may be president again one day.

Thanks for not being a hypocrite :):)

here is the text:

"The central office has received several parent calls in regard to a letter for all school principals from Arne Duncan (Secretary of Education) which announces that on September 8th President Obama will provide a national address directly to all students across America. The letter encourages principals to allow the broadcast to be live in their buildings. This has not been confirmed through DESE and will not be something **** Schools will be participating in. We have no background information or guidelines to follow within our curriculum to try to provide a setting for this format."

??

on the internet, including place of employment.

:blush:

If I get this from my daughter's school distract, I'm gonna blow a gasket!!!

I'll absolutely write this school to protest.

Can you send to this BS to KO, Rachel, Rick Sanchez (CNN), David Shuster, et al?

...inform parents. You might be livid about this...another parent would be livid for an opposite reason. School districts can't please everyone. People are entitled to their opinions...so the schools let the PARENTS decide.

:eyes:

I was told today that the schools were threatened with protest if the president's address did not provided an opt-out.

Oohh kay.

Whatever happened to "question authority"?

Have we gotten to the point that we have so little respect for the office of POTUS that a speech -- not a prayer, not a lesson -- but a speech on "the importance of taking responsibility for their education" is possibly offensive or inflammatory and thus parents could sue??!!!

If they piped in Limbaugh or Maddow....sure....but it's THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!!!

They did it with Reagan, not sure about beyond that time since I was out of school by then. But even if one disagrees politically, as long as the SPEECH isn't political, IT'S POTUS and respect should be shown. I'd be shouting from the rooftops if they did this to Bush, and I sure as shit wouldn't have put a lot of stock into WHAT he would have said, so long as it was a generic motivational speech for students and not political and not a prayer.

This makes me more sad than anything has thus far in the political arena, and I'm pretty friggin devastated about things.

This is complete Twilight Zone time for me as to why -- HOW -- this can even be an issue.

:(



THE PRESIDENT'S BACK-TO-SCHOOL MESSAGE TO AMERICA'S STUDENTS

Help get America’s students engaged! On Tuesday, September 8 — the first day of school for many students — the President will talk directly to students across the country on the importance of taking responsibility for their education, challenging them to set goals and do everything they can to succeed. We want to make sure that as many schools and classrooms nationwide can participate in this special opportunity, so we are making the President’s address and all the information that comes with it available as widely as possible. Whether you are a teacher, a school board member, or a member of the media, find information below to help you watch and be engaged with the President in welcoming our students back to school.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/mediaresources/

...knowledge about the legal responsibilities of schools, principals, and teachers. I'm amazed at the ignorance about public schools in this country.

I support what President Obama is doing by giving the speech. As a teacher, I'd want to show it to my students. But it isn't my decision...it's the PARENTS' decision because the kids are under 18.

This isn't about 'discriminating against president Obama.' It's about the rights of students and parents in a community.

Edited to add:

You said, "Have we gotten to the point that we have so little respect for the office of POTUS that a speech -- not a prayer, not a lesson -- but a speech on "the importance of taking responsibility for their education" is possibly offensive or inflammatory and thus parents could sue??!!!"

I don't know your experience in the public schools system, but yes, we are there. Sadly. Parents have sued for WAY less. If you aren't aware that sometimes districts are sued for trivial reasons, some homework ;) on your part may be in order.

Please forgive MY ignorance. (Yes, I take offense at your tone.)

I am not asked to approve every lesson she is taught nor everything she is exposed to.

What am I missing? Why is a speech by POTUS different from the lesson plan decided upon WITHOUT my approval?

in AP English, nor did I pitch a fit about it when I found out. EVEN when it turns out the AP English teacher is a fan and the only thing she mentioned about Ted Kennedy was Chappaquiddick.

...for her class? If not, maybe you should have 'pitched a fit'.

...from a 'discriminate' against Obama perspective...what was fair or unfair to him.

Some in this thread come at it from a 'discriminate' against students perspective...what is fair if all students are included in or excluded from hearing Obama's speech.

And still others come at it from a parents' perspective...what is the parental role if the parent doesn't get his/her way. Some want opt in...some don't. Some don't want such a speech in the schools...some think it's discrimination if everyone isn't made to watch it.


There is another perspective, and it is the school's perspective. All school districts operate under an education/legal policy...by law. Schools notify parents to protect students and themselves legally. Some here are ignorant of public school policies.

I do not mean to offend anyone by that, but I'm sure I will. Ignorance doesn't mean a person isn't intelligent...just that they have not had the opportunity yet to learned something. Sometimes they are unaware of that lack of information.

We who work in education have a perspective based on our experience with and knowledge of education policy.

This action by schools is preventative. It's about not getting sued by parents. Anytime a school or district adds something to the school's program, parents have the legal right to be informed and to opt out if they so choose. These are under-age students. The parents have rights. If it's a controversial curriculum or program (or speech), where many parents may have strong feelings, the school or district is legally protecting itself by informing parents and giving them the choice...in advance. It is standard practice by schools, that's all I'm saying.

Maybe a lawsuit would be laughed out of court, but it is not discrimination. It's CYA by the school district, because they know the community in which they live. Keep in mind the heated political environment right now...remember the crazies at the health care town halls? No principal or superintendent wants them showing up in his/her office with irrational complaints...and they WOULD be irrational.

If racism is a factor...and it probably is out there, judging by the town halls...I think it is better to throw water on it (by parental choice) than add a match to it. JMHO.

And parents don't get to micromanage their kids' curricula - at least at schools that warrant the name - so what's different here?

What on earth is going on?

shaking I'm so infuriated. They need to take the flags down if they're going to make speeches such as the one scheduled optional for the students. If there's that much of a lack of respect in general, then there's no need to feign patriotism.

Granted, those screaming the most are the ones thumping their chests and wrapping themselves in the flags 24/7.

Once again the hypocrisy is astounding.

And if lawsuits are that prevalent over every little thing such that it's not "safe" for a SCHOOL to show a speech by POTUS aimed at motivating STUDENTS, then I'm at a loss for words.

I don't see it as hypocritical. If bush had decided he wanted to give speeches that every child in the nation had to listen to, I would have viewed it as mandatory political indoctrination and a misuse of the office/abuse of power, and I would have been pissed.

I respect your opinion. I do disagree. :)

Patriotism and respect for the OFFICE of the president are linked, IMHO.

Whatever part of the brain is supposed to make us feel patriotic has always been missing from mine. I just generally try to do what's right, but honestly I don't give a shit about the flag and such.

- worst veteran ever :)

.....a political moment?

He (Rove) was a master of spinning almost anything into his nutty agenda.

or simply not keeping my child in a bubble. She will hear other opinions, be exposed to other values.

Even if he would have turned it into something with which I disagree, I would NEVER dream of trying to block my child from listening to the president.

I will simply explain where I disagree afterwards.

...schools in this thread is overwhelming. And sad.

...I answered and explained at least ten times and still people do not get that 'opt in' or 'opt out' is the way schools work. THAT decision has ZERO to do with President Obama. It is pure CYA.

We need to make sure the news media is aware that Republicans are threatening schools, and forcing them into providing an opt-out option to take kids out of a presidential speech.

And there is no authority in the land that could impose such a requirement on every school

... do that. It's just smart policy.

We live in a nation of free choice. I hate wrestling and UFC. I don't watch. I despised Bush. I never watched his speeches.

I like freedom......to me it goes BOTH ways.

by giving their ignorant and/or partisan parents the opportunity to deprive them of listening to an historic address.

Seriously, if your child is in a California public school, you can opt them out of any lesson or activity with a letter. Sex ed, standardized testing, evolution, math involving the number three... any damned thing you want. All it takes is a letter and a parent's signature. And amazingly enough, people don't abuse it.

It's a little odd to announce the opt out procedure in relation to one specific activity (other than sex ed,) but considering that it's Florida I'm guessing they got tired of answering the phone to screaming rednecks and explaining that little Neveah doesn't have to watch the lack guy with the big words on the teevee if her mother-aunt doesn't want her too.

Right wingers have hijacked school away from teachers, and health care away from doctors, and so on. It's revolting.

Parents are ultimately in charge of their children's education and good parents know their children's needs and capabilities. Besides, hardly anybody uses it. I know in my elementary school one child got opted out of sex ed when we had it in fifth and sixth grade (she participated in junior high and high school) and my class was a fairly equal mix of Catholics and Mormons. That's the only time I recall any of my classmates being opted out of anything.

Having an opt out means that the occasional fundamentalist or other crank has no stake in changing the curriculum, since their kids don't have to participate. It also keeps them from keeping the kid home the whole day, which they'd likely do otherwise. It might not work in the land of the crazies, but up here it works fine because there aren't enough of them to cause much of a fuss.

...thank you...for explaining it better than I ever could.:)

Bush and Reagan did it. Did you protest then? Bet not.

GOP name>'s address?" thread full of spleen splitting angst?

Because there are many here who would. We need to remember, it's not always gonna be our guy. And when it is our guy, like now, we cannot go about acting in a way that could bite us in the ass.

nt

cans wanting the teachers to figure it all out for them.

If you are a parent it is your responsibility to know these things.

a parent's rights supercedes that of a government official, including the president. They may be wrong in my eyes, but we cannot come to the point where we force children to watch one president or the other. That seems Stalinish.

If people wanted to do that entirely, they homeschool, but parents do have a say in the educational process and most PTA's and school boards and advocate grps, not to mention the power of special education and parents have influence.

But ultimately, the schools set the curriculum, but it is not a dictatorship. Parents, regardless of their ignorance, have a right to their opinion and their role as parent.

Are you a parent and do you work in education?

If people wanted to do that entirely, they homeschool, but parents do have a say in the educational process and most PTA's and school boards and advocate grps, not to mention the power of special education and parents have influence.

But ultimately, the schools set the curriculum, but it is not a dictatorship. Parents, regardless of their ignorance, have a right to their opinion and their role as parent.

Are you a parent and do you work in education?

- it used to be that children were required to pray in school, to stand and say the pledge of allegiance, to say "under God" but those days are gone. Children are allowed to opt out of sex ed and even opt out of the requirement for vaccinations if you are opting out for religious reasons.

I think this would get a better reception from both schools and parents if they had an opportunity to preview the address or at least had a summary of what it would cover. It may be that some parents are waiting to view it with their children at home on youtube, knowing that it will eventually get there.

just destroying schools altogether like rightwingnuts have been trying for decades to do?

- Seems like everything is "opt" in or out these day.

Do we want no opting out at all? Or just some? Who gets to decide what that some is? The local district? Then again, it will never be unanimous.

(On Edit: Sorry, I meant to reply to OP, not here) :)


I think that's why those of us who are upset by this would be equally upset if it happened under Bush.

It's about people making political hay out of things that AREN'T political whatsoever.

For a PUBLIC (key word) school system to even have to be concerned -- in any way, shape or form -- about airing a speech by the duly elected POTUS, a speech which is merely motivational and not political or ideological in any way, is unfathomable to me.

If scheduling or technology is an issue, that I understand. But for them to not air it because of potential parental disapproval is amazing to me.

That a parent COULD disapprove of such a thing -- in a formal way which influences the school district and therefore other students -- is what amazes me.

No wonder our citizenry is so apathetic and uninformed.

Most of them opt out of life altogether.

Pathetic.

...but you are very naive about schools. Your words:


"That a parent COULD disapprove of such a thing -- in a formal way which influences the school district and therefore other students -- is what amazes me."


They do it all the time. ALL THE TIME.

and I've read the other responses you've shared throughout the various threads. And, I appreciate the viewpoint you're expressing, based on direct experience.

Yes, I am partly naive, as our school district doesn't utilize the opt in/out approach nearly as much as other schools, so I'm surprised by this.

The other part is that perhaps disappointed...disappointed beyond words...is the more appropriate term to have used. I'm beyond disappointed that a parent would disapprove of such a thing. That it would ever cross their mind TO try to block their child from watching a speech by POTUS. A speech about education, NOT a political speech.

I fully recognize that parents CAN protest this, that and the other. But the reality that a speech by POTUS falls under the category of what they MAY legally protest has me stunned.

It's a public school. It's not a political or religious speech. It's a speech by the leader of this country.

Yes, I'm stunned.

On Edit (lots of edits today...lol): Even though it happens all the time, as you correctly say, it most certainly doesn't make it right. I'm sorry administrators have to be worried about so many things beyond the education and safety of the students.

We've jumped the shark as a nation if the crazies win over the next month.

Good luck to you, btw. :)

...your sincerity. We agree on a lot. This, for example, is how I feel, too:

"The other part is that perhaps disappointed...disappointed beyond words...is the more appropriate term to have used. I'm beyond disappointed that a parent would disapprove of such a thing. That it would ever cross their mind TO try to block their child from watching a speech by POTUS. A speech about education, NOT a political speech."

And this:
"Even though it happens all the time, as you correctly say, it most certainly doesn't make it right. I'm sorry administrators have to be worried about so many things beyond the education and safety of the students."

This, too:
"We've jumped the shark as a nation if the crazies win over the next month."


I think it's sad. But I also believe Obama is our best hope. As long as we...his supporters...NEVER give up, I think we will prevail over 'the crazies.' Besides, there are a lot more of us than there are of them. :7

....flooding the local rag or TV station with complaints about the teachers and the "liberal" schools "indoctrinating" their rugrats.

I don't blame a school administrator who simply wants to dodge all that shit.

about it. This is not a communist country or a dictatorship where everyone MUST listen to the leader whether they want to or not. Like it or not, people still have the freedom in this country to decide whether or not they want to listen to leaders and if they want their children to listen to them. Forced adherence is not democracy.

On sunday, we were able to go to chapel for services, or say in the barracks doing laundry. No other option. We couldn't lay on the bunk and read (not that there was anything to read) or stare at the ceiling. Laundry or church.

So, those who 'opt out' of the speech can spend the time picking up litter in the schoolyard, cleaning up graffiti, whatever. No ifs, ands, or buts.

The choice belongs to the kids.