So, What Exactly Are They Teaching Children Now?

I imagine that they still teach reading writing and math. I was disappointed when I found out that they no longer have art or music classes. They also no longer have gym. Band and football are really not good substitutes for the large majority of students. In this sense, they only teach half of what is needed to make good citizens.
 
I imagine that they still teach reading writing and math. I was disappointed when I found out that they no longer have art or music classes. They also no longer have gym. Band and football are really not good substitutes for the large majority of students. In this sense, they only teach half of what is needed to make good citizens.



Is that just in your schools or everywhere?
 
As far as I can recall, there wasn't anything like "freedom of speech" when I was in school. Everything was peer pressure. You didn't dare say the wrong thing for fear of being considered "uncool" or being identified as being part of the "wrong crowd."

....
Sounds like you were a bit insecure.
 
Does not having kids (at least at the moment) mean that I shouldn't be concerned about their education? I didn't know the girl who got raped in the school bathroom, but that doesn't mean that it didn't bother me.
I suppose not. We are just came out of the trump era or error, depending on point of view. We had a Secretary of Education who had never attended a public school, public university, had a teaching credential of any kind, served on a school board, held a position of any kind related to education or instruction, or even been a member of the PTA. Did you see any improvement in education during the last 4 years or is this where we're at, dangling from a participle? (see what I did there? Don't you hate "at" hanging on the end of a sentence?)
I am actually more than satisfied, you deserve and are entitled to an opinion on education. Pretty sure, like your husband, you would do no intentional harm. Not so sure about the last Secretary of Education.
 
Because when I was in school,.. freedom of speech was freedom of speech. Has it become freedom of speech as long as people like what you're saying otherwise you'll be censored?
When I went to school back in the 1950s and 1960s, I learned the freedom of speech was there to protect hate speech. While you might not agree with someone’s statement you should be willing to fight for his right to say it.

We were taught to allow differing opinions and debate them respectfully. We were also taught how to think not what to think.

Obviously times have changed and in some cases not for the better. Today many people think you should be fined or imprisoned for saying something they disagree with. For example some people want a doctor who expresses negative views of the COVID-19 vaccines to lose his license.




The First Amendment guarantees the right to freedom of expression. Many Americans—from college students to journalists to legal scholars—believe that guarantee shouldn’t apply to hate speech. As they argue, hate speech tramples on the constitutional rights of its targets by insulting, threatening, or silencing them based on characteristics that are protected under antidiscrimination laws (such as ethnicity, religion, gender, or disability). After all, the U.S. Supreme Court has carved out First Amendment exceptions for certain kinds of particularly dangerous or harmful speech. But the Court hasn’t recognized an exception for hate speech, unless it falls under one of the other kinds of unprotected expression.

Hate Speech and Fighting Words

In 1942, the Supreme Court said that the First Amendment doesn’t protect “fighting words,” or statements that “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace” (Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)). In later decisions, the Court narrowed this exception by honing in on the second part of the definition: direct, personal insults that are so offensive they’re likely to provoke their specific target to respond immediately with violence. The Court has also said that laws can’t prohibit only some types of fighting words, like those based on racial bias (R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992)).

But what about the first part of the Chaplinsky definition of fighting words—statements that are inherently harmful? Courts have generally found that the First Amendment protects speech if it causes only emotional injury, no matter how offensive it is. In one case, the father of a military veteran sued the Westboro Baptist Church for emotional distress after church members picketed his son’s funeral with hateful, antigay signs. The Supreme Court found that the First Amendment protected the picketing. The Court focused on the fact that the signs (like “God Hates Fags” and “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”) mainly addressed public issues. (Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011).)


 
I imagine that they still teach reading writing and math. I was disappointed when I found out that they no longer have art or music classes. They also no longer have gym. Band and football are really not good substitutes for the large majority of students. In this sense, they only teach half of what is needed to make good citizens.
Who is "they"?
 
Kids are still taught English, History, Math, and Science. There is still gym class, band, art, etc. All the classics.
 

Forum List

Back
Top