[solemnclockwork]

Originally Posted by MMM

solemnclockwork, I would enjoy your posts if they didn't completely misrepresent and distort both the spirit and the literal words I am saying.

But thank you for giving me insight into the mindset of someone who would believe such an incomprehensible notion to me that having the most powerful man in America (and maybe the world) speak directly to our sons and daughters to do their homework and stay in school is anything but a good thing.

The fact that my words can be so misconstrued makes it easy for me to understand why the president's good intentions have been twisted and turned into "indoctrination" and "brainwashing" by those that see the president's tongue as a serpent's and devil horns growing above his ears.

Way to put a underhanded back slap into that. Perhaps you shouldn't put those tones into your writing. Also would you care to provide examples?

MMM, at this point you very well know that it is not the issue of speaking to children along those lines. Yet you continue to make it so. Why can't you seam to understand that people come to different conclusions, and BECAUSE of the current political environment AND arguably (there is a huge reason why I use that word) issues that have been handled by the white house. At the very least don't degrade people like that.

Enough of this patronizing. You continue to lump me together with those, who I don't have the same conclusion with! You certainly don't see that way, I don't see that way, DOESN'T mean someone else will not. The only people who I'm defending (not exactly) are those who are not doing this out of hate/lies nut honestly thank there is a problem.

Originally Posted by MMM

Of course every parent should be a part of a child's education.
There is no need to be have a "legitimate reason". You are SUPPOSED to be a part of your child's education. Without the parents the child will probably fail.

Education is influence. Education influences children to explore, dissect, ask questions, get answers, come to conclusions, experiment, and to listen to all sorts of opinions and construct a belief system that fits ones worldview.

Education is not about shutting down voices we don't agree with. Education is not about shutting down voices of our leaders, like them or not. And Education is not about telling the person sitting in the most important office in the country that he isn't good enough to talk to my child.

Yet, the parent is rightfully in charge of that education wither you like it or not. Wither you agree or not, they do retain the right of what and how there child learns. At this point, you not in a position to degrade, and question someone who is trying to be a good parent. Wither that be a conservative view, or liberal view. Constructive criticism comes to mind.

Originally Posted by MMM

Of course I agree with that. And blocking a child from hearing a message about staying in school, taking responsibility for themselves, doing their homework and respecting their teachers is the opposite of "looking out for the best".

that is very well what the speech is, BUT that was NEVER MY POINT!

Originally Posted by MMM

I agree. There is another level at play here, and I think it has everything to do with being black or white.

What are you playing at?

Originally Posted by MMM

That's exactly what I am trying to do. Teaching children that people are not trustworthy and we shouldn't listen to what they have to say, even though we don't know what they have to say, is backwards thinking. Instead of "give him a chance" it's "DON'T give him a chance". Instead of allowing children to see more than one side, people are censoring multiple opinions. Instead of giving education and the benefit of the doubt, children and teens are being told "you are too stupid to listen to our leaders words".

That is not what happening thought (bold part). Regardless of the actual intellect of the student, a parent is still a parent and doesn't want certain thing in there view to influence there children.

It wasn't the fact they didn't know what was going to be said, but what might be said. I'll give an example of something; would you rather give the chance for your child of getting hurt/whatnot or perhaps having foreknowledge (again, I'm taking this from a viewpoint that a parent might have, not my own) of the situation prevent that from happening by taking steps? Maybe that would be over-parenting, maybe something bad was prevented, I'm not discussing the results of there actions. What I'm coming from is two-fold one is the honestly of there actions (If they believe what they are doing), and there parental rights.

Originally Posted by MMM

I am not sorry, solemnclockwork, when I say you have no leg to stand on. The speech is out there. It is good. Conservative naysayers are backing down, saying children SHOULD listen to this speech. But it is sad that it is mostly too late. Teachers have been threatened, people have been called all kinds of names, and this becomes a black-eye on a valiant attempt by the president to do a good thing for children.

that is funny, questioning my reasoning here. I was never challenging the speech WAS I? I was defending the right of the parent to see fit how to raise there children, and my own view of what the priorities might or should be (not a big issue for me).

Yet, both sides continue to point the finger in each others eye on every issue? Do you not get the drift? Each side is not blameless!

Originally Posted by MMM

So how is saying "the fear is unfounded" wrong?

Because of the way it was worded. I said may, hence I was referring to when it happens or they read the actual speech. Like how they coming out and now saying people should listen to the speech.

Originally Posted by Nyororin

I find this whole ordeal almost laughable.

Do parents really think a short speech is going to have enough power to overwrite all the things they have taught their children up until this point? If it does - that parenting thing? You`re doing it wrong.

Personally, I would be ashamed if the influence I had upon my child was so incredibly weak that a short speech from someone they did not know in real life could completely overturn it. Seriously - if you`re an involved parent, you should have raised your child according to your beliefs and taught them to follow the same path. Parents have an incredible amount of power over their children.

But I guess if people want to live in a fantasy world where the worst possible influence to their child`s future is a single short speech possibly containing political views they don`t agree with, from a guy in a tv screen... Umm, yeah.

Everybody has different parenting (or will have...) and convictions. At times they going to have a good thing going and at others not so much. I would put in bluntly on the fact that America is very polarized, and in essence people tend to be more defensive and offensive on issues like this.

Because this is your view, doesn't mean others think the same way. Some honestly believe opposite, I'm not faulting them for that, and I would give criticism (constructive) for it, becuase in a way I'm not the child's parent, and have limited role in dealing with how they raise that child.

I would say going out of the way to make the parent the enemy here isn't going to help things.

I can not stress the word honestly enough. It hits all points that I'm coming from. (sincerity, naivety, truthfulness, and conviction).

Parents can make wrong decisions, I'm not advocating people to run and hide (me myself being someone who is a devout christian who constantly reads about other religions, you get the point). I do see where others are coming from, wither I agree with them or not.