Jim DeMint: Gays And Unmarried, Pregnant Women Should Not Teach Public School

[Madeline]

There are so many things wrong with his statements that I don't even know where to begin criticizing them.

Maybe that is because you are "comfortably numb". Teachers are role models. If they want to display behaviors that are against the taxpayers' (parents') beliefs or morals, they should not be supported by tax dollars. If they want to run their own schools and display those behaviors, go for it! Use free enterprise to push your beliefs, not my tax dollars.

Lets see, I don't know where to begin with the so many things wrong in your statements............sigh.

Comfortably numb = Accepts people for who and what they are.

Teachers Role Models = No, that is your mommy slaving on her knees for some executive at work.

Taxpayers are not against gay or singles behaviors. Phtttt!

Run their own school = No they want to run the public schools & don't give a fuck if you like it or not!! LOL!

Don't use my tax dollars = Sorry, we might make an American out of you yet......... LMAO!!

Comfortably numb was in the icon. To me, it means, I tolerate evil and will do nothing to stop it.

If the teacher has authority over the student, the teacher is a role model.

I never said that taxpayers were against " gay or singles behaviors". I suggested there were appropriate places for that behavior.

Yes, I know they want to run "public" schools. That might explain why more people are home-schooling their children. They don't want their children being taught "immorality" and atheism religion at school.

I made a suggestion that those behaviors could be tried in the "free-market" for a school that promoted that type of behavior. Obviously, there is no one here that thinks that type of behavior would be searched out for a price. That would imply the only way to "force exposure" to students is by using public funds to push an immoral agenda.[/QUOTE]

This is just despicable. I cannot read any more of this shit.

 

[uptownlivin90]

There are so many things wrong with his statements that I don't even know where to begin criticizing them.

Maybe that is because you are "comfortably numb". Teachers are role models. If they want to display behaviors that are against the taxpayers' (parents') beliefs or morals, they should not be supported by tax dollars. If they want to run their own schools and display those behaviors, go for it! Use free enterprise to push your beliefs, not my tax dollars.

Lets see, I don't know where to begin with the so many things wrong in your statements............sigh.

Comfortably numb = Accepts people for who and what they are.

Teachers Role Models = No, that is your mommy slaving on her knees for some executive at work.

Taxpayers are not against gay or singles behaviors. Phtttt!

Run their own school = No they want to run the public schools & don't give a fuck if you like it or not!! LOL!

Don't use my tax dollars = Sorry, we might make an American out of you yet......... LMAO!!

Comfortably numb was in the icon. To me, it means, I tolerate evil and will do nothing to stop it.

If the teacher has authority over the student, the teacher is a role model.

I never said that taxpayers were against " gay or singles behaviors". I suggested there were appropriate places for that behavior.

Yes, I know they want to run "public" schools. That might explain why more people are home-schooling their children. They don't want their children being taught "immorality" and atheism religion at school.

I made a suggestion that those behaviors could be tried in the "free-market" for a school that promoted that type of behavior. Obviously, there is no one here that thinks that type of behavior would be searched out for a price. That would imply the only way to "force exposure" to students is by using public funds to push an immoral agenda.[/QUOTE]

AGAIN, ANSWER THE QUESTION: if a teacher is raped, get's pregnant, and has the baby how is that "IMMORAL"?

 

[mudwhistle]

If morals are taught at home, why should immorality be taught at school?

Well...that is the goal. Teach them relaxed standards then when they need to elect a total piece of shit like say Obama then the kids won't mind it a bit. They're all fucked after all.

By all means, let's strive to raise even more kids who commit hate crimes against their fellow students because they are gay (or black, or asian, or Jewish, or Catholic or Muslim or from out of town or whatever), because by God that teenaged suicide rate just ain't high enough to suit the raging bigots yet!

Lady...you're confusing teaching kids to hate with not exposing them to lax morals. I can't see why you'd want to bring the subject up with them in the first place.

 

[NYcarbineer]

DeMint is speaking as a Senator right?

Since DeMint also believes that the federal government has no business being in the education business, essentially,

by his own standards, whether or not gays teach school is none of HIS fucking business.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Well...that is the goal. Teach them relaxed standards then when they need to elect a total piece of shit like say Obama then the kids won't mind it a bit. They're all fucked after all.

By all means, let's strive to raise even more kids who commit hate crimes against their fellow students because they are gay (or black, or asian, or Jewish, or Catholic or Muslim or from out of town or whatever), because by God that teenaged suicide rate just ain't high enough to suit the raging bigots yet!

Lady...you're confusing teaching kids to hate with not exposing them to lax morals. I can't see why you'd want to bring the subject up with them in the first place.

I don't think we should be doing either. We shouldn't be teaching kids to be "tolerant" and we shouldn't be teaching kids to be "righteous in the eyes of the Lord" either. That's why we're like 25 in math in the World, people have their own agendas when teaching children. Just f-ing stop it. Teach them what they are supposed to learn.

 

[logical4u]

This has to be one of the stupidest posts I've read on here in awhile. Congrats on setting that bar so high, or would it be so low? Either way, congrats.

Based on your logic, we should have drunks, drug addicts, prostitutes teaching in public schools? Why do you say my post is stupid?

So women who have babies out of wedlock and gays are comparable to drug addicts and prostitutes?

I guess maybe if a teacher gets pregnant off a rape that classifies as "out-of-wedlock"? And we should force them either to explain to their 7 year old school students that they were beaten and violently forced to have sex, that way they won't think that the teacher did anything "immoral".

Or maybe they should just have an abortion.

Fucking idiots.

I believe Jim DeMint's statement was about people that touted their immorality. I agree with him, you, apparently, don't.
If there was no public schools and you had the choice of two private schools: one where the teachers acted professionally, and dressed in muted fashion where the focus was on the intellect and learning, and the other where the teachers dress and behavior drew the focus onto themselves and personality, not so much on the intellet, which would you choose for your children?
I work for my employer. I am expected to dress for the job, and act in a professional manner. That is all I am saying that I expect teachers to do. You seem to think teachers should be encouraged to behave as "individuals" with all their personal beliefs, foremost in the classroom. I disagree. I pay them to teach, not work on their egos.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well...that is the goal. Teach them relaxed standards then when they need to elect a total piece of shit like say Obama then the kids won't mind it a bit. They're all fucked after all.

By all means, let's strive to raise even more kids who commit hate crimes against their fellow students because they are gay (or black, or asian, or Jewish, or Catholic or Muslim or from out of town or whatever), because by God that teenaged suicide rate just ain't high enough to suit the raging bigots yet!

Lady...you're confusing teaching kids to hate with not exposing them to lax morals. I can't see why you'd want to bring the subject up with them in the first place.

Whose morals?

Maybe we shouldn't let smokers, or drinkers, or gamblers teach...

 

[logical4u]

Sen. Jim DeMint: Gays And Unmarried, Pregnant Women Should Not Teach Public School





There are so many things wrong with his statements that I don't even know where to begin criticizing them.

Maybe that is because you are "comfortably numb". Teachers are role models. If they want to display behaviors that are against the taxpayers' (parents') beliefs or morals, they should not be supported by tax dollars. If they want to run their own schools and display those behaviors, go for it! Use free enterprise to push your beliefs, not my tax dollars.

So what about the parents who support gay rights? Should the teachers who agree with DeMint be barred from teaching in public schools?

Are those parents going to be given class time to "push" their agenda? Are the teachers that agree with DeMint going to "push" that agenda?

 

[logical4u]

And based on YOUR logic,

being gay or pregnant out of wedlock should be ILLEGAL,

as are all of your examples.

That's a fail, friend.

Where did I say those should be illegal? (That would increase the size of the government)
I would encourage those "teachers" to start their own school. It would demonstrate how many parents would "pay" to have their children "exposed" to people that choose to live a less moral lifestyle.

Guessing by the amount of negative feedback, some of you feel that the schools are a great experiment to be conducted on other people's children, and not an institution that focuses on reading, writing, and arithmetic. How does "exposing" children to distractive lifestyles improve their test scores?

logical4u, what the fuck makes your values superior to mine? I want my kidlet to grow up free of bigotry, able to respect her elders and authority figures without demnding the 411 on their personal lives. I dun know WTF you hope to pass on to your children, but I see no reason me and mine should fund your little 1950's fantasy camp of Repression Was So Wonderful.

Great answer to how someone imposing their "values" on student improves test scores.
Did I get this right, you don't mind if immorality and the religion of atheism is taught at school; it is acceptable to you. You mind if someone suggests that teachers should act and dress in a professional manner that is condusive to student learning.

 

[uptownlivin90]

Based on your logic, we should have drunks, drug addicts, prostitutes teaching in public schools? Why do you say my post is stupid?

So women who have babies out of wedlock and gays are comparable to drug addicts and prostitutes?

I guess maybe if a teacher gets pregnant off a rape that classifies as "out-of-wedlock"? And we should force them either to explain to their 7 year old school students that they were beaten and violently forced to have sex, that way they won't think that the teacher did anything "immoral".

Or maybe they should just have an abortion.

Fucking idiots.

I believe Jim DeMint's statement was about people that touted their immorality. I agree with him, you, apparently, don't.
If there was no public schools and you had the choice of two private schools: one where the teachers acted professionally, and dressed in muted fashion where the focus was on the intellect and learning, and the other where the teachers dress and behavior drew the focus onto themselves and personality, not so much on the intellet, which would you choose for your children?
I work for my employer. I am expected to dress for the job, and act in a professional manner. That is all I am saying that I expect teachers to do. You seem to think teachers should be encouraged to behave as "individuals" with all their personal beliefs, foremost in the classroom. I disagree. I pay them to teach, not work on their egos.

Ummm... no. I think teachers should do what they're paid to do and teach.

My main concern is how exactly Jim DeMint would plan to enforce "morality" on public school teachers. AGAIN a woman can have a baby out of wedlock for a host of reasons, reasons that can only be determined if school systems PRY into their private lives in a way that violates their privacy.

A woman who is the victim of a rape and now has to deal with the birth of a child should not have to deal with the added scrutiny of having to tell her employees why she's having a baby out of wedlock to defend her damn job. Which is something "christian conservatives" and "morality police" tend to forget, that they're enforcement of "morals" endanger women who might want to make the decision to have a baby but the fact that the school district may through stones at her like this is 1745 somewhere and put a scarlet letter on her forehead might cause her to go get that abortion thing you evangelicals hate so much. I'm pro-choice. Which means CHOICE. Not forcing women to have abortions to keep their jobs and that's what DeMint is talking about, albeit he probably doesn't even realize it, but that's why extremist christian rightists shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an elected position because they don't fucking think before they do things.


ANYWAY...

Discussions of teacher's personal lives SHOULD NOT come up in the classroom AT ALL. PERIOD. I'm not for teachers "flaunting their lifestyles". I'm for teachers keeping the shit to themselves and the government keeping out of people's lives. Nice try though.

 

[fyrenza]

I was EXAGERATING to make a point. If you don't want children to follow examples that will not help them ethically or morally, you don't "expose" them on a daily basis. Drugs, guns, sex are all part of real life, but we don't WANT them in our schools either. There are appropriate places for advertising your beliefs. School is an appropriate place to learn about math, reading, and writing. I would not want a "hot body" teacher that had every inch of skin tatooed, any more than I would want a half-starved model with full make-up in front of my children everyday, either. I would not think that person would be sending a message of focusing on the intellect; they would be sending a message of focus on the body and appearances.
When it comes to "dealing" with situations or people, the parent should have some sayso with their children. The school has an obligation to protect children from harmful settings, that includes people that would influence them to do things that might be immoral (otherwise the school system would have a program for prisoners of 'adopt a student' day or take your student to prison day).

Just for you... that last part was an EXAGERATION too.

I know what you're saying ~

please don't think that I don't.

But I don't get to be the Ruler of All,

thank goodness ~

how fucking boring would it all be if I had to say how EVERYTHING was going to be?

It's the SURPRISES,

good, bad and in between,

that keep it all interesting

AND which allow us to actually relate to each other, whether discussing why something IS good, bad or in between,

or just having to think above and beyond our own selves.

I DO want guns, sex and whatever the other thang you said, IN SCHOOLS.

I want kids to KNOW what guns fucking DO to lives, when used, selfishly.

I want kids to KNOW where babies come from.

OMG! You Did NOT say that, about tattoos!!! THAT is SUCH a personal decision, an an artistic representation of how someone feels ~

much like my choice of font, size and color.

If you think a teacher has THAT much power over your children? To the EXCLUSION of YOUR influence over them?

They're already lost, 'cuz you aren't even trying to relate to them, ON A PERSONAL and LOVING level.

That's sad.

 

[logical4u]

MORALS should be taught At Home,

NOT in a school.

My God, even HE gave us freedom of choice!

Teach Your Children Well;

TALK to them;

BE their Role Models,

YOUR OWN SELF.

You can't pay folks to do it for you...

Screw morals.

If a woman decides to have a child and raise her child despite the absense of a father GOD BLESS HER.

A woman with a job and steady income taking care of her child is more then commendable. If she is doing so, nobody has the right to call what she did or does "immoral".

Pushing unwed teachers into abortion clinics so they don't loose there jobs doesn't sound like the "christian right", and believe me that's exactly what's going to happen. Then again the "christian right" only has "morals" when it fits their own sick little agenda.

Keep your morals out of public schools.

As for gays, the sexual preference of a teacher shouldn't be an issue because the sexual preference of the teacher shouldn't be brought up in the classroom with children. Therefore it's a non-issue and just another way for the ignorant senator from South Carolina to stir up the crazies and send them into another frenzy.

Let's clarify:
no morals:
stealing is okay
bullying is okay
bearing false witness, okay
murder, okay
coming and going as you please, okay
selling drugs in school, okay
sex at school, okay
guns at school, no we can't have that
blackmail, okay
kidnapping, okay

Teachers acting and dressing in a professional manner, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

 

[logical4u]

MORALS should be taught At Home,

NOT in a school.

My God, even HE gave us freedom of choice!

Teach Your Children Well;

TALK to them;

BE their Role Models,

YOUR OWN SELF.

You can't pay folks to do it for you...

If morals are taught at home, why should immorality be taught at school?

So getting raped and having the child is immoral?

Where did anyone say anything against a rape victim? Where did anyone suggest abortions? Is being professional so alien to you, that you want to go off in another direction?

 

[logical4u]

If morals are taught at home, why should immorality be taught at school?

Well...that is the goal. Teach them relaxed standards then when they need to elect a total piece of shit like say Obama then the kids won't mind it a bit. They're all fucked after all.

Maybe we can teach them to read and write?

That is the point. The students are the priority and not the teacher's ego (or agenda).

 

[uptownlivin90]

MORALS should be taught At Home,

NOT in a school.

My God, even HE gave us freedom of choice!

Teach Your Children Well;

TALK to them;

BE their Role Models,

YOUR OWN SELF.

You can't pay folks to do it for you...

Screw morals.

If a woman decides to have a child and raise her child despite the absense of a father GOD BLESS HER.

A woman with a job and steady income taking care of her child is more then commendable. If she is doing so, nobody has the right to call what she did or does "immoral".

Pushing unwed teachers into abortion clinics so they don't loose there jobs doesn't sound like the "christian right", and believe me that's exactly what's going to happen. Then again the "christian right" only has "morals" when it fits their own sick little agenda.

Keep your morals out of public schools.

As for gays, the sexual preference of a teacher shouldn't be an issue because the sexual preference of the teacher shouldn't be brought up in the classroom with children. Therefore it's a non-issue and just another way for the ignorant senator from South Carolina to stir up the crazies and send them into another frenzy.

Let's clarify:
no morals:
stealing is okay
bullying is okay
bearing false witness, okay
murder, okay
coming and going as you please, okay
selling drugs in school, okay
sex at school, okay
guns at school, no we can't have that
blackmail, okay
kidnapping, okay

Teachers acting and dressing in a professional manner, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Stealing- Against the Law.
Bullying- Against the Law (harrassment).
Bearing False Witness- Against the Law.
Murder- Against the Law.
Sex in public places- Against the Law.
Selling drugs- Against the Law.
Guns on government property- Against the Law.
blackmail- Against the Law.
Kidnapping- Against the Law.

Guess what?

Having a baby out of wedlock- Not against the Law.
Sodomy- Not against the Law.

Can you guess why?

 

[uptownlivin90]

If morals are taught at home, why should immorality be taught at school?

So getting raped and having the child is immoral?

Where did anyone say anything against a rape victim? Where did anyone suggest abortions? Is being professional so alien to you, that you want to go off in another direction?

DeMint said women having babies out of wedlock.

If you get raped and get pregnant you will have a baby out of wedlock.

Kids can figure out that "Ms. so-and-so" is having a baby, but her name is "Ms" so she's not married.

Now what? Does the teacher have to explain to the children in each of her classes that she didn't sin against God but that she was forced into sex?

 

[fyrenza]

Great answer to how someone imposing their "values" on student improves test scores.
Did I get this right, you don't mind if immorality and the religion of atheism is taught at school; it is acceptable to you. You mind if someone suggests that teachers should act and dress in a professional manner that is condusive to student learning.

And on THIS note,

Mad is OFF iggy!

AND I'm even going to Rep her!

In a POS way!

 

[mudwhistle]

By all means, let's strive to raise even more kids who commit hate crimes against their fellow students because they are gay (or black, or asian, or Jewish, or Catholic or Muslim or from out of town or whatever), because by God that teenaged suicide rate just ain't high enough to suit the raging bigots yet!

Lady...you're confusing teaching kids to hate with not exposing them to lax morals. I can't see why you'd want to bring the subject up with them in the first place.

Whose morals?

Maybe we shouldn't let smokers, or drinkers, or gamblers teach...

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

 

[logical4u]

If morals are taught at home, why should immorality be taught at school?

Well...that is the goal. Teach them relaxed standards then when they need to elect a total piece of shit like say Obama then the kids won't mind it a bit. They're all fucked after all.

By all means, let's strive to raise even more kids who commit hate crimes against their fellow students because they are gay (or black, or asian, or Jewish, or Catholic or Muslim or from out of town or whatever), because by God that teenaged suicide rate just ain't high enough to suit the raging bigots yet!

Can you give some evidence of those claims? Demonstrate where children are focused on learning legitimate school subjects are committing hate crimes.

Are you saying the schools SHOULD teach MORALS when it comes to "accepting" others?

 

[uptownlivin90]

Lady...you're confusing teaching kids to hate with not exposing them to lax morals. I can't see why you'd want to bring the subject up with them in the first place.

Whose morals?

Maybe we shouldn't let smokers, or drinkers, or gamblers teach...

I don't think they're doing it in front of the kids.

But if you want to let everyone else provide bad examples to our kids then so should the above be allowed to do so.

How many gay teachers do you know that have sex infront of children?