Is your MSer learning the 13 Guiding Principles of BLM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we also ok with teaching the NRA’s mission statement? I think studying modern political movements is valid but I don’t like the propaganda feel of this-how is that better than indoctrination? I want kids to be able to choose BLM ideas because they learn about all the current political movements. I’m worried we have become a society that no longer values critical thinking.

OP here

I also feel this way. I’d be uncomfortable with the school spending an hour learning about the NRA’s Guiding Principles or someone above mentioned the Family Research Council.

It’s one thing to mention and discuss these organizations in the context of history. Or even in the context of current events. But spending an hour selling the virtues of the BLM to middle schoolers feels inappropriate. From this thread, it sounds as if I might be somewhat in the minority.

And I agree about the lack of critical thinking! I’ve already discussed this with my kid and why I think it was odd. And obviously encourage DC to make their own decisions and come to their own conclusions. After getting information from multiple sources.

You are not in the minority. Lot of families support diversity, equity, and inclusion and want it taught along with critical thinking. However, most do not want a political movement and its propaganda taught as if it is fact. I would also be strongly opposed to any teaching of the NRA or Family Resource Council values and principles. School is about learning how to critically analyze information, not brainwashing kids when they are 5 so they support your politics. I say this as a moderate Democrat that hates Trump. A lot of people seem to "assume" (aka make stereotypical judgements) that anyone that does not support the BLM guiding principles is a Trump supporter).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we also ok with teaching the NRA’s mission statement? I think studying modern political movements is valid but I don’t like the propaganda feel of this-how is that better than indoctrination? I want kids to be able to choose BLM ideas because they learn about all the current political movements. I’m worried we have become a society that no longer values critical thinking.

OP here

I also feel this way. I’d be uncomfortable with the school spending an hour learning about the NRA’s Guiding Principles or someone above mentioned the Family Research Council.

It’s one thing to mention and discuss these organizations in the context of history. Or even in the context of current events. But spending an hour selling the virtues of the BLM to middle schoolers feels inappropriate. From this thread, it sounds as if I might be somewhat in the minority.

And I agree about the lack of critical thinking! I’ve already discussed this with my kid and why I think it was odd. And obviously encourage DC to make their own decisions and come to their own conclusions. After getting information from multiple sources.

You are not in the minority. Lot of families support diversity, equity, and inclusion and want it taught along with critical thinking. However, most do not want a political movement and its propaganda taught as if it is fact. I would also be strongly opposed to any teaching of the NRA or Family Resource Council values and principles. School is about learning how to critically analyze information, not brainwashing kids when they are 5 so they support your politics. I say this as a moderate Democrat that hates Trump. A lot of people seem to "assume" (aka make stereotypical judgements) that anyone that does not support the BLM guiding principles is a Trump supporter).

I had no idea that "Everybody is important, and has the right to be safe and happy" was such a controversial statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we also ok with teaching the NRA’s mission statement? I think studying modern political movements is valid but I don’t like the propaganda feel of this-how is that better than indoctrination? I want kids to be able to choose BLM ideas because they learn about all the current political movements. I’m worried we have become a society that no longer values critical thinking.

OP here

I also feel this way. I’d be uncomfortable with the school spending an hour learning about the NRA’s Guiding Principles or someone above mentioned the Family Research Council.

It’s one thing to mention and discuss these organizations in the context of history. Or even in the context of current events. But spending an hour selling the virtues of the BLM to middle schoolers feels inappropriate. From this thread, it sounds as if I might be somewhat in the minority.

And I agree about the lack of critical thinking! I’ve already discussed this with my kid and why I think it was odd. And obviously encourage DC to make their own decisions and come to their own conclusions. After getting information from multiple sources.

You are not in the minority. Lot of families support diversity, equity, and inclusion and want it taught along with critical thinking. However, most do not want a political movement and its propaganda taught as if it is fact. I would also be strongly opposed to any teaching of the NRA or Family Resource Council values and principles. School is about learning how to critically analyze information, not brainwashing kids when they are 5 so they support your politics. I say this as a moderate Democrat that hates Trump. A lot of people seem to "assume" (aka make stereotypical judgements) that anyone that does not support the BLM guiding principles is a Trump supporter).

I had no idea that "Everybody is important, and has the right to be safe and happy" was such a controversial statement.

It’s not a controversial statement but that statement is a LOT different and not equivalent to BLM principles. This is an organization that has demanded violence if it doesn’t gets its way. Last I checked, that is the definition of terrorism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I had no idea that "Everybody is important, and has the right to be safe and happy" was such a controversial statement.

It’s not a controversial statement but that statement is a LOT different and not equivalent to BLM principles. This is an organization that has demanded violence if it doesn’t gets its way. Last I checked, that is the definition of terrorism.

It's literally and word-for-word one of the principles.

https://sites.education.miami.edu/crecer/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/06/13-Principles-for-Elementary.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I had no idea that "Everybody is important, and has the right to be safe and happy" was such a controversial statement.

It’s not a controversial statement but that statement is a LOT different and not equivalent to BLM principles. This is an organization that has demanded violence if it doesn’t gets its way. Last I checked, that is the definition of terrorism.

It's literally and word-for-word one of the principles.

https://sites.education.miami.edu/crecer/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/06/13-Principles-for-Elementary.pdf

Ok but the NRA has lots of nice sounding statements too, but they are still propaganda. I agree with many of BLM movements ideas but I don’t think they should be taught as doctrine- I don’t think they get everything right nor do any current movements. We are not some zealously nationalist country that has to brainwash our kids into beliefs to uphold our values. Our values our strong and can withstand robust debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I had no idea that "Everybody is important, and has the right to be safe and happy" was such a controversial statement.

It’s not a controversial statement but that statement is a LOT different and not equivalent to BLM principles. This is an organization that has demanded violence if it doesn’t gets its way. Last I checked, that is the definition of terrorism.

It's literally and word-for-word one of the principles.

https://sites.education.miami.edu/crecer/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/06/13-Principles-for-Elementary.pdf

Ok but the NRA has lots of nice sounding statements too, but they are still propaganda. I agree with many of BLM movements ideas but I don’t think they should be taught as doctrine- I don’t think they get everything right nor do any current movements. We are not some zealously nationalist country that has to brainwash our kids into beliefs to uphold our values. Our values our strong and can withstand robust debate.

Could you name two of them, please?

Also, could you explain why you believe MCPS is teaching kids the idea that everybody is important and has the right to be safe and happy as doctrine?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I had no idea that "Everybody is important, and has the right to be safe and happy" was such a controversial statement.

It’s not a controversial statement but that statement is a LOT different and not equivalent to BLM principles. This is an organization that has demanded violence if it doesn’t gets its way. Last I checked, that is the definition of terrorism.

It's literally and word-for-word one of the principles.

https://sites.education.miami.edu/crecer/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/06/13-Principles-for-Elementary.pdf

Ok but the NRA has lots of nice sounding statements too, but they are still propaganda. I agree with many of BLM movements ideas but I don’t think they should be taught as doctrine- I don’t think they get everything right nor do any current movements. We are not some zealously nationalist country that has to brainwash our kids into beliefs to uphold our values. Our values our strong and can withstand robust debate.

Could you name two of them, please?

Also, could you explain why you believe MCPS is teaching kids the idea that everybody is important and has the right to be safe and happy as doctrine?

.

Sure :
1. Protection of the U.S. Constitution
2. Granting Americans their rights
Imagine if we taught that was what the NRA stood for and were silent about all the criticism of their lobbying efforts?!!

It is doctrine if they are not also teaching criticisms. As I mentioned earlier some research indicates reducing police interaction in low income neighborhoods results in more minority deaths. Is that research being presented? What about the Wikipedia cited criticisms such as “A majority of Black Americans oppose the Black Lives Matter slogan "defund the police", and are against decreased policing.[456] Critics note that evidence supports the idea that police reduce crime, including the killing of Black Americans.[457][458][459]”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

Wikipedia is actually more educational than schools at this point. That is not good news for anyone. I

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sure :
1. Protection of the U.S. Constitution
2. Granting Americans their rights
Imagine if we taught that was what the NRA stood for and were silent about all the criticism of their lobbying efforts?!!

It is doctrine if they are not also teaching criticisms. As I mentioned earlier some research indicates reducing police interaction in low income neighborhoods results in more minority deaths. Is that research being presented? What about the Wikipedia cited criticisms such as “A majority of Black Americans oppose the Black Lives Matter slogan "defund the police", and are against decreased policing.[456] Critics note that evidence supports the idea that police reduce crime, including the killing of Black Americans.[457][458][459]”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

Wikipedia is actually more educational than schools at this point. That is not good news for anyone. I

Like this part, you mean?

"Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a decentralized political and social movement protesting against incidents of police brutality and all racially motivated violence against black people.[1][2][3][4][5] While there are specific organizations such as the Black Lives Matter Global Network that label themselves simply as "Black Lives Matter", the Black Lives Matter movement comprises a broad array of people and organizations. The slogan "Black Lives Matter" itself remains untrademarked by any group.[6] The broader movement and its related organizations typically advocate against police violence toward black people as well as for various other policy changes considered to be related to black liberation.[7]"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sure :
1. Protection of the U.S. Constitution
2. Granting Americans their rights
Imagine if we taught that was what the NRA stood for and were silent about all the criticism of their lobbying efforts?!!

It is doctrine if they are not also teaching criticisms. As I mentioned earlier some research indicates reducing police interaction in low income neighborhoods results in more minority deaths. Is that research being presented? What about the Wikipedia cited criticisms such as “A majority of Black Americans oppose the Black Lives Matter slogan "defund the police", and are against decreased policing.[456] Critics note that evidence supports the idea that police reduce crime, including the killing of Black Americans.[457][458][459]”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

Wikipedia is actually more educational than schools at this point. That is not good news for anyone. I

Like this part, you mean?

"Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a decentralized political and social movement protesting against incidents of police brutality and all racially motivated violence against black people.[1][2][3][4][5] While there are specific organizations such as the Black Lives Matter Global Network that label themselves simply as "Black Lives Matter", the Black Lives Matter movement comprises a broad array of people and organizations. The slogan "Black Lives Matter" itself remains untrademarked by any group.[6] The broader movement and its related organizations typically advocate against police violence toward black people as well as for various other policy changes considered to be related to black liberation.[7]"

Doesn't fit the narrative...

[Anonymous]

https://www.dcareaeducators4socialjustice.org/black-lives-matter/13-guiding-principles

Part of the problem is the way the 13-guiding principles are worded. I don't think it will achieve mass acceptance. It's not that there isn't a point to be made - it's more of what is your intent in teaching it. Is it to achieve unity across America, or divide it?

I would personally support a Cultural Awareness class (ex. you study Black cuture, Hspanic culture, Asian culture, Anglo-Saxon, etc.) and how stereotyping occurs.

Personally, I think the 13-guiding principles are fine if you're teaching a Black child to stand up for themselves, but there's got to be a better way of phrasing stuff like "we are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement" if you want to teach a wider audience? What if a child is mixed-race or a parent likes a "nuclear family"?

Although you can't please everyone all the time - at least find something that the majority of folks (including non-Blacks) can get behind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcareaeducators4socialjustice.org/black-lives-matter/13-guiding-principles

Part of the problem is the way the 13-guiding principles are worded. I don't think it will achieve mass acceptance. It's not that there isn't a point to be made - it's more of what is your intent in teaching it. Is it to achieve unity across America, or divide it?

I would personally support a Cultural Awareness class (ex. you study Black cuture, Hspanic culture, Asian culture, Anglo-Saxon, etc.) and how stereotyping occurs.

Personally, I think the 13-guiding principles are fine if you're teaching a Black child to stand up for themselves, but there's got to be a better way of phrasing stuff like "we are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement" if you want to teach a wider audience? What if a child is mixed-race or a parent likes a "nuclear family"?

Although you can't please everyone all the time - at least find something that the majority of folks (including non-Blacks) can get behind.

Not necessarily the first question that comes to my mind, with respect to the public school social studies curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read quite a bit of this thread and want to clarify one thing. BLM is not a political organization. It is a social activisism. The 13 principles State except everybody for who they are. Everybody has value

https://sites.education.miami.edu/crecer/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/06/13-Principles-for-Elementary.pdf

Yes. can you imagine not agreeing with those principles.

Well, one of them is about dismantling the nuclear family. How do you feel about that?

Do I think the government should deny the label of family to a family when their father dies at war? I ABSOLUTELY disagree with the GOP definition of nuclear family that does not include widows. Not only do I disagree with it... I think it’s godless and a sin.

Also.... pssst <whisper> that’s not 1 of the 13 guiding principles.

You keep bringing this up, but you are delusional. Republicans are the ones most likely to donate money to charitable causes, etc. to support widows. No one is trying to take benefits from widows. But children who have two parents are more likely to have better mental health, achieve academically, escape poverty, less likely to be addicted, etc. So society should promote two parent families, for the benefit of children.

You know what would lead to more two-parent families? Eliminating the carceral state, wherein Black males are much more likely to serve long prison sentences for minor offenses like possession of marijuana. Eliminating the school-to-prison pipeline for Black and Latinx youth. Proper and affordable access to birth control to prevent unwanted or unplanned pregnancies, including abortion support. I could go on. But hmmm, I don’t think that’s what you were suggesting...

There's no school to prison pipeline. There's a crappy home to prison pipeline, sure. Progressive just bemoan that fact that the state isn't functioning enough as parents to make up for all the crappy or non-existent parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If didn’t see anything in the 13 principles that should actually trigger anyone. It all representative of basic human empathy that we have been taught for decades.

None of the critical race theory bogeyman that conservative TV is obsessed with but can’t seem to actually describe in detail.

Here's some critical race theory for you. https://images.app.goo.gl/RVuceZnoRKeXjf3r5

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sure :
1. Protection of the U.S. Constitution
2. Granting Americans their rights
Imagine if we taught that was what the NRA stood for and were silent about all the criticism of their lobbying efforts?!!

It is doctrine if they are not also teaching criticisms. As I mentioned earlier some research indicates reducing police interaction in low income neighborhoods results in more minority deaths. Is that research being presented? What about the Wikipedia cited criticisms such as “A majority of Black Americans oppose the Black Lives Matter slogan "defund the police", and are against decreased policing.[456] Critics note that evidence supports the idea that police reduce crime, including the killing of Black Americans.[457][458][459]”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

Wikipedia is actually more educational than schools at this point. That is not good news for anyone. I

Like this part, you mean?

"Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a decentralized political and social movement protesting against incidents of police brutality and all racially motivated violence against black people.[1][2][3][4][5] While there are specific organizations such as the Black Lives Matter Global Network that label themselves simply as "Black Lives Matter", the Black Lives Matter movement comprises a broad array of people and organizations. The slogan "Black Lives Matter" itself remains untrademarked by any group.[6] The broader movement and its related organizations typically advocate against police violence toward black people as well as for various other policy changes considered to be related to black liberation.[7]"

What's your point again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I had no idea that "Everybody is important, and has the right to be safe and happy" was such a controversial statement.

It’s not a controversial statement but that statement is a LOT different and not equivalent to BLM principles. This is an organization that has demanded violence if it doesn’t gets its way. Last I checked, that is the definition of terrorism.

It's literally and word-for-word one of the principles.

https://sites.education.miami.edu/crecer/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/06/13-Principles-for-Elementary.pdf

Ok but the NRA has lots of nice sounding statements too, but they are still propaganda. I agree with many of BLM movements ideas but I don’t think they should be taught as doctrine- I don’t think they get everything right nor do any current movements. We are not some zealously nationalist country that has to brainwash our kids into beliefs to uphold our values. Our values our strong and can withstand robust debate.

Could you name two of them, please?

Also, could you explain why you believe MCPS is teaching kids the idea that everybody is important and has the right to be safe and happy as doctrine?

NP

I am all for teaching our kids that everybody is important and has the right to be safe and happy. I am not okay with teaching them about an anti-cop anarchist organization under the impression that it is a Civil right organization.

As a cop (a Black one as well, since apparently nowadays everything revolves around race), I would be incredibly angry if my 8th graded was taught about BLM, at least without contextualizing the damage, anger, and destruction caused by the organization and those operating under its banner. I was in Downtown DC during the riots, got spat on, attacked, screamed at, called all sort of swear words, “Uncle Tom,” “N-word,” “Oreo,” “Murderer,” basically whatever they felt like. I watched as my coworkers were similarly attacked. Sure, maybe not every rioter was a card-carrying BLM supporter, but they certainly called themselves “BLM and had no problem spouting off their mantra between curses.

There are many organization and the like out there, both historically and in current times, that actually advocate for justice for minority populations and pushing them upwards, not back into injustice. Just like how there are many organizations that push for responsible gun regulations and rights, while the NRA is mostly a shame. So why teach about one that encroaches on domestic terrorism at almost every protest or meet up they set up?