Floida is investigating a teacher who showed a Disney movie with a gay character

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

That still doesn't answer why the parent felt the need to tattle on the teacher to the state board. A parent has a right to be upset in the situation you described and should be dealt with the school administration or school board. However, going to the state and demanding an investigation is extereme and is very much in line with facism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

The same argument could apply to teaching evolution at any age. We teach evolution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

That still doesn't answer why the parent felt the need to tattle on the teacher to the state board. A parent has a right to be upset in the situation you described and should be dealt with the school administration or school board. However, going to the state and demanding an investigation is extereme and is very much in line with facism.

It's in line with being a hysterical snitch. I think the word fascist loses meaning when everything we disagree with is suddenly exactly like Hitler.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

The same argument could apply to teaching evolution at any age. We teach evolution.

And not without controversy. It is also ideological.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

"lifestyles"

How are you going to get rid of all content that "promote lifestyles" when literally most school material involves human beings? According to your way of thinking, we all are promoting our own lifestyles. You are promoting your own lifestyle, whatever that may be.

Also, where is there sex in the film she showed?

Yes, humans have lifestyles. But they aren't showing a film of my lifestyle to children. Nor would I recommend doing that, it's NSFW and definitely not for school.

So you agree, no movies that show any kind of human romantic relationship/partnership of any kind should ever be shown to children.

They should stick to educational documentaries like natgeo, as a pp suggested.

In nature, the vast majority of sex is heterosexual. It's fine to show March of the Penguin, for example, and its portrayal of heterosexual penguins. Im not aware of a gay penguin documentary, or a documentary where a boy penguin wishes it could lay eggs or anything like that. If such a documentary exist it would be interesting to watch.

But yes. I think our culture is now bifurcated between secularists and traditionalists, and both sides treat their views as religious in nature. So that limits what it is acceptable for public schools to screen during movie time.

In nature, the vast majority of creatures are not disabled or deformed. So that means movies shouldn’t promote the disabled or deformed lifestyle, right?

What are you talking about? Disabled and deformed animals are totally normal and occur with likely the same frequency as humans. Omg. Go touch grass, and notice the 3-legged and tailless squirrels while you're at it. Genuinely wondering if I'm debating a bot now.

Ok and the hundreds of animal species that engage in homosexual behavior, of which humans happen to be one of those species, we are allowed to acknowledge what occurs naturally, just not if it's a homo sapien?

The issue is that most parents don't approve of discussions of sex or sexual relationships of any type in elementary school. And then a large subset of parents explicitly don't approve of gay relationships. I don't agree with them. But I respect religious minorities. I don't think we should create a situation where only secular children can attend public schools. The consequences of that kind of segregation are not something that will help our society.

If a child attends school, they are going to see and hear things. The child is going to be exposed to kids with gay parents regardless of what movie is shown. A movie that shows that homosexuality exists (and does NOT show sex) isn't any different. Because homosexuality exists. That's it.

Teachers are in a position of authority. When a teacher expresses her opinion to young students, it is taken as fact. The teacher choosing to show this movie to a captive audience all while knowing many parents would disagree was highly inappropriate. She knew what she was doing but thought she’d get away with it because she was leaving the school anyway. Now she has to face consequences she maybe didn’t consider. No sympathy here.

I don’t mind as much when my kids hear things from their peers because I know my opinions matter more to them. They can always come to me to fact check their friends and that opens doors for me to help shape values. That’s what PARENTS are supposed to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

To what extent do we cater to fringe minorities at the expense of progress? Should we not show films with women working or being educated because that goes against certain ideological or religious points of view? How far down this slippery slope do we go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

"lifestyles"

How are you going to get rid of all content that "promote lifestyles" when literally most school material involves human beings? According to your way of thinking, we all are promoting our own lifestyles. You are promoting your own lifestyle, whatever that may be.

Also, where is there sex in the film she showed?

Yes, humans have lifestyles. But they aren't showing a film of my lifestyle to children. Nor would I recommend doing that, it's NSFW and definitely not for school.

So you agree, no movies that show any kind of human romantic relationship/partnership of any kind should ever be shown to children.

They should stick to educational documentaries like natgeo, as a pp suggested.

In nature, the vast majority of sex is heterosexual. It's fine to show March of the Penguin, for example, and its portrayal of heterosexual penguins. Im not aware of a gay penguin documentary, or a documentary where a boy penguin wishes it could lay eggs or anything like that. If such a documentary exist it would be interesting to watch.

But yes. I think our culture is now bifurcated between secularists and traditionalists, and both sides treat their views as religious in nature. So that limits what it is acceptable for public schools to screen during movie time.

In nature, the vast majority of creatures are not disabled or deformed. So that means movies shouldn’t promote the disabled or deformed lifestyle, right?

What are you talking about? Disabled and deformed animals are totally normal and occur with likely the same frequency as humans. Omg. Go touch grass, and notice the 3-legged and tailless squirrels while you're at it. Genuinely wondering if I'm debating a bot now.

Ok and the hundreds of animal species that engage in homosexual behavior, of which humans happen to be one of those species, we are allowed to acknowledge what occurs naturally, just not if it's a homo sapien?

The issue is that most parents don't approve of discussions of sex or sexual relationships of any type in elementary school. And then a large subset of parents explicitly don't approve of gay relationships. I don't agree with them. But I respect religious minorities. I don't think we should create a situation where only secular children can attend public schools. The consequences of that kind of segregation are not something that will help our society.

If a child attends school, they are going to see and hear things. The child is going to be exposed to kids with gay parents regardless of what movie is shown. A movie that shows that homosexuality exists (and does NOT show sex) isn't any different. Because homosexuality exists. That's it.

Teachers are in a position of authority. When a teacher expresses her opinion to young students, it is taken as fact. The teacher choosing to show this movie to a captive audience all while knowing many parents would disagree was highly inappropriate. She knew what she was doing but thought she’d get away with it because she was leaving the school anyway. Now she has to face consequences she maybe didn’t consider. No sympathy here.

I don’t mind as much when my kids hear things from their peers because I know my opinions matter more to them. They can always come to me to fact check their friends and that opens doors for me to help shape values. That’s what PARENTS are supposed to do.

Many teachers intentionally try to teach children progressive values because they believe raising children with conservative values is inherently abusive. I think you give them too much credit when you say "maybe she didn't consider that." I suspect she fully understood and aired it with the intention of exposing the children to values compatible with her own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

"lifestyles"

How are you going to get rid of all content that "promote lifestyles" when literally most school material involves human beings? According to your way of thinking, we all are promoting our own lifestyles. You are promoting your own lifestyle, whatever that may be.

Also, where is there sex in the film she showed?

Yes, humans have lifestyles. But they aren't showing a film of my lifestyle to children. Nor would I recommend doing that, it's NSFW and definitely not for school.

So you agree, no movies that show any kind of human romantic relationship/partnership of any kind should ever be shown to children.

They should stick to educational documentaries like natgeo, as a pp suggested.

In nature, the vast majority of sex is heterosexual. It's fine to show March of the Penguin, for example, and its portrayal of heterosexual penguins. Im not aware of a gay penguin documentary, or a documentary where a boy penguin wishes it could lay eggs or anything like that. If such a documentary exist it would be interesting to watch.

But yes. I think our culture is now bifurcated between secularists and traditionalists, and both sides treat their views as religious in nature. So that limits what it is acceptable for public schools to screen during movie time.

In nature, the vast majority of creatures are not disabled or deformed. So that means movies shouldn’t promote the disabled or deformed lifestyle, right?

What are you talking about? Disabled and deformed animals are totally normal and occur with likely the same frequency as humans. Omg. Go touch grass, and notice the 3-legged and tailless squirrels while you're at it. Genuinely wondering if I'm debating a bot now.

Ok and the hundreds of animal species that engage in homosexual behavior, of which humans happen to be one of those species, we are allowed to acknowledge what occurs naturally, just not if it's a homo sapien?

The issue is that most parents don't approve of discussions of sex or sexual relationships of any type in elementary school. And then a large subset of parents explicitly don't approve of gay relationships. I don't agree with them. But I respect religious minorities. I don't think we should create a situation where only secular children can attend public schools. The consequences of that kind of segregation are not something that will help our society.

If a child attends school, they are going to see and hear things. The child is going to be exposed to kids with gay parents regardless of what movie is shown. A movie that shows that homosexuality exists (and does NOT show sex) isn't any different. Because homosexuality exists. That's it.

Teachers are in a position of authority. When a teacher expresses her opinion to young students, it is taken as fact. The teacher choosing to show this movie to a captive audience all while knowing many parents would disagree was highly inappropriate. She knew what she was doing but thought she’d get away with it because she was leaving the school anyway. Now she has to face consequences she maybe didn’t consider. No sympathy here.

I don’t mind as much when my kids hear things from their peers because I know my opinions matter more to them. They can always come to me to fact check their friends and that opens doors for me to help shape values. That’s what PARENTS are supposed to do.

Many teachers intentionally try to teach children progressive values because they believe raising children with conservative values is inherently abusive. I think you give them too much credit when you say "maybe she didn't consider that." I suspect she fully understood and aired it with the intention of exposing the children to values compatible with her own.

Really doesn't matter what her intention was, if its a PG film she can show it. Perhaps the parents should really take their complaint to the MPAA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

To what extent do we cater to fringe minorities at the expense of progress? Should we not show films with women working or being educated because that goes against certain ideological or religious points of view? How far down this slippery slope do we go?

A couple things. Traditionalists are not a fringe. They make up about half of our culture. And they make up an even larger portion of the migrants that are coming to the US in increasing numbers. Progressive views tend to exist largely among white, wealthy, educated people. While some progressives deviate from this stereotypes, they are not the norm. So as our culture becomes less and less white/wealthy, progressivism will wane even more.

Second. There isn't any major religion that is opposed to women working or being educated. Some religions emphasize gender roles, but there isn't a major religion that bans women working or being educated. You can find examples of fringe groups-- the Taliban, which is a government rather than a religion-- but no mainstream religion holds these views.

So. I would say you are intentionally pretending that sexual Traditionalists, who are mainstream, are the same thing as the Taliban, which are a fringe group, in order to claim that white, wealthy Americans should be able to make all decisions about education in America without any push back from minority groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

"lifestyles"

How are you going to get rid of all content that "promote lifestyles" when literally most school material involves human beings? According to your way of thinking, we all are promoting our own lifestyles. You are promoting your own lifestyle, whatever that may be.

Also, where is there sex in the film she showed?

Yes, humans have lifestyles. But they aren't showing a film of my lifestyle to children. Nor would I recommend doing that, it's NSFW and definitely not for school.

So you agree, no movies that show any kind of human romantic relationship/partnership of any kind should ever be shown to children.

They should stick to educational documentaries like natgeo, as a pp suggested.

In nature, the vast majority of sex is heterosexual. It's fine to show March of the Penguin, for example, and its portrayal of heterosexual penguins. Im not aware of a gay penguin documentary, or a documentary where a boy penguin wishes it could lay eggs or anything like that. If such a documentary exist it would be interesting to watch.

But yes. I think our culture is now bifurcated between secularists and traditionalists, and both sides treat their views as religious in nature. So that limits what it is acceptable for public schools to screen during movie time.

In nature, the vast majority of creatures are not disabled or deformed. So that means movies shouldn’t promote the disabled or deformed lifestyle, right?

What are you talking about? Disabled and deformed animals are totally normal and occur with likely the same frequency as humans. Omg. Go touch grass, and notice the 3-legged and tailless squirrels while you're at it. Genuinely wondering if I'm debating a bot now.

Ok and the hundreds of animal species that engage in homosexual behavior, of which humans happen to be one of those species, we are allowed to acknowledge what occurs naturally, just not if it's a homo sapien?

The issue is that most parents don't approve of discussions of sex or sexual relationships of any type in elementary school. And then a large subset of parents explicitly don't approve of gay relationships. I don't agree with them. But I respect religious minorities. I don't think we should create a situation where only secular children can attend public schools. The consequences of that kind of segregation are not something that will help our society.

If a child attends school, they are going to see and hear things. The child is going to be exposed to kids with gay parents regardless of what movie is shown. A movie that shows that homosexuality exists (and does NOT show sex) isn't any different. Because homosexuality exists. That's it.

Teachers are in a position of authority. When a teacher expresses her opinion to young students, it is taken as fact. The teacher choosing to show this movie to a captive audience all while knowing many parents would disagree was highly inappropriate. She knew what she was doing but thought she’d get away with it because she was leaving the school anyway. Now she has to face consequences she maybe didn’t consider. No sympathy here.

I don’t mind as much when my kids hear things from their peers because I know my opinions matter more to them. They can always come to me to fact check their friends and that opens doors for me to help shape values. That’s what PARENTS are supposed to do.

Many teachers intentionally try to teach children progressive values because they believe raising children with conservative values is inherently abusive. I think you give them too much credit when you say "maybe she didn't consider that." I suspect she fully understood and aired it with the intention of exposing the children to values compatible with her own.

Really doesn't matter what her intention was, if its a PG film she can show it. Perhaps the parents should really take their complaint to the MPAA.

Teachers don't have unlimited authority in the classroom. Parents delegate their authority to the schools. Schools do not have independent power to show any PG film they choose, teach any lesson, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

To what extent do we cater to fringe minorities at the expense of progress? Should we not show films with women working or being educated because that goes against certain ideological or religious points of view? How far down this slippery slope do we go?

A couple things. Traditionalists are not a fringe. They make up about half of our culture. And they make up an even larger portion of the migrants that are coming to the US in increasing numbers. Progressive views tend to exist largely among white, wealthy, educated people. While some progressives deviate from this stereotypes, they are not the norm. So as our culture becomes less and less white/wealthy, progressivism will wane even more.

Second. There isn't any major religion that is opposed to women working or being educated. Some religions emphasize gender roles, but there isn't a major religion that bans women working or being educated. You can find examples of fringe groups-- the Taliban, which is a government rather than a religion-- but no mainstream religion holds these views.

So. I would say you are intentionally pretending that sexual Traditionalists, who are mainstream, are the same thing as the Taliban, which are a fringe group, in order to claim that white, wealthy Americans should be able to make all decisions about education in America without any push back from minority groups.

Well, our society is set up to vote for the rules we want. I know where I stand on the banning issue - and have always stood - so I will vote accordingly. Laws that result in a teacher being investigated for one instance of showing an appropriately rated movie don't sit well with me. Perhaps they do with you.

Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

To what extent do we cater to fringe minorities at the expense of progress? Should we not show films with women working or being educated because that goes against certain ideological or religious points of view? How far down this slippery slope do we go?

A couple things. Traditionalists are not a fringe. They make up about half of our culture. And they make up an even larger portion of the migrants that are coming to the US in increasing numbers. Progressive views tend to exist largely among white, wealthy, educated people. While some progressives deviate from this stereotypes, they are not the norm. So as our culture becomes less and less white/wealthy, progressivism will wane even more.

Second. There isn't any major religion that is opposed to women working or being educated. Some religions emphasize gender roles, but there isn't a major religion that bans women working or being educated. You can find examples of fringe groups-- the Taliban, which is a government rather than a religion-- but no mainstream religion holds these views.

So. I would say you are intentionally pretending that sexual Traditionalists, who are mainstream, are the same thing as the Taliban, which are a fringe group, in order to claim that white, wealthy Americans should be able to make all decisions about education in America without any push back from minority groups.

Well, our society is set up to vote for the rules we want. I know where I stand on the banning issue - and have always stood - so I will vote accordingly. Laws that result in a teacher being investigated for one instance of showing an appropriately rated movie don't sit well with me. Perhaps they do with you.

Good luck.

Yes, we should all vote and register our views on these issues. Good luck to you.