NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/or/politics/805

Text File | 1993-01-24 | 6.8 KB | 121 lines

Newsgroups: or.politics
Path: sparky!uunet!tessi!eaglet!slipknot!robert
From: [e-mail] (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: educational system
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 00:14:20 GMT
Lines: 109

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (jason downs) writes:
|>The views YOU'VE been expressing are consistent with the religious
|>right.  Does that mean that this was a self description?
|
|i've found the intense hatred for the religious right by the liberal sector
|to be quite interesting. and how they always assume that if someone believes
|in ultra-conservative politics, that someone must be some kind of christian
|fundamentalist. and that if someone believes that homosexuality should not
|be a basis for minority status, that person must be heterosexual.

I hope you're not accusing ME of having an intense hatred for the religious
right.  As many of them have parroted about the homosexual community, I don't
hate people based on either their views or their behaviors.  (Hell, my future
brother-in-law is a fundamentalist minister.)  I just think they are misguided.
But even with that opinion, I would do nothing to restrict their rights to gain
protections under the law, which is more that we can say about the activist wing
of the religious right.  And if I remember correctly, it was YOU who was
expressing fundamentalist beliefs under the aegis of conservatism, and casting
all that you despise into a box marked "liberal."

|funny how i've not seen conservatives make those kinds of assumptions.

So, does that mean you don't count yourself as a conservative either?  Because
your views are a classic example of such assumptiveness.  You've expressed
opinions on a wide range of topics and called them conservatism, while I have
tried to point out the differences between classical conservatism and religious
fundamentalism.

|>Sigh.  As I suggested below, teaching "the facts" is not sufficient preparation
|>for survival in a community.  Quality circles in modern manufacturing jobs
|>require the ability to analyze.  Participation in our democracy requires the
|>ability to make informed decisions in the face of conflicting "facts."
|>Colleges are getting more difficult to enter and require more capable high
|>school graduates.  "Decent" paying jobs will no longer go to someone who can
|>merely read, write, and add.  It ain't the 50s any more.
|
|it's wonderful how you are able to contradict yourself with every sentence.
|first, you state that teaching "the facts" is not sufficient preparation for
|survival within society. then, you explain how lack of acedemic [sic] abilities
|prevent [sic] a person from making a living, participating in government,
|getting into college, etc. now, try to actually think logically for a second,
|rather than just following your liberal brainwashing...

None of what I have said is self-contradictory, but I do make a distinction
between education based on rote memorization of "facts" with little emphasis on
analysis and divergent viewpoints, and that which stimulates the creative and
analytical faculties, broadens the mind, and improves a person's adaptability,
all valuable assets in our modern world.  Remember, you were the one to mention
"the facts" and teaching the basics, and to oppose "multi-culturalism."  All I'm
doing is saying that the basics are not enough, and that for example, a
multi-cultural historical perspective is likely to stimulate more analysis and
come closer to a complete understanding of historical events than study based on
a narrower view.  I'd also suggest a little self-analysis.  Who among us has
been showing a narrower, more likely "brainwashed" perspective?

|the fact is, with all bullshit aside, if our public education was actually
|reformed in such a way as to provide a solid education, rather than focusing
|on the ideals of a utopian society, and said educational system were able
|to teach kids how to compete in the world, rather than how to have sex,
|they would in the end be able to get along better within society.

Who said anything about utopian indoctrination?  Or about not wanting solid
education?  Or that teaching basic human physiology and sexual function would
prevent the communication of that solid educational background?  Your ideology
is getting in the way of your ability to understand what I'm saying.

|>Not true.  Community standards generally overide personal standards, and a
|>responsible community ensures that children brought up within it know what
|>conduct is expected of them.
|
|yes, it would be something if a community could ensure that children within
|that community knew what sort of conduct is expected of them. of course,
|the way to do that is to reach the parents, not the children. the children
|will look to their parents, not society, whether society agrees with the
|view of those parents or not.

It certainly would be valuable to let the parents teach their children, and in
many households, that already happens.  But all you have to do for a
counterexample is to look at the dynamics of most immigrant families that have
been assimilated into our country over the last twenty years.  The fastest
learners are the youngest, and it is through them that American cultural values
are most quickly infused into their households.  There are fundamental values
which will be maintained and conveyed by the family elders, and I'm not
suggesting that that not occur.  But the fastest way to achieve a common
experience, which you endorsed in your mono-cultural views, is through the
children and the educational system.

|>Individuals who cannot abide by such restrictions should seek communities
|>more in line with their views, or seek hermitage.
|
|oh, yes, if one can't live within the socialist utopia, they should have
|to fend for themselves.

Here's more of your ideology showing through.  I never mentioned utopia,
socialist or otherwise.  It's a basic fact that has been demonstrated in history
dozens of times (e.g., the Puritans, the Hugonauts, the Mormons, the White
Russians, etc.) that socio/religious groups that find themselves at odds with
their greater communities have sought hermitage in geographic isolation.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed            Home Animation Ltd.        503-656-8414
[e-mail]    5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

DISORDER IN THE COURT

Q James stood back and shot Tommy Lee?
A Yes.
Q And then Tommy Lee pulled out his gun and shot James in the fracas?
A (After a hesitation) No sir, just above it.
________________________________________________________________________________