Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
If they did the State could require the parents to explain how doing so would be in the best interest of the child. If they had a reasonable arguement the State should respect the parents decision even if they disagreed. You obviously haven't presented a reasonable argument to disallow your child to read.
|
having a personal meeting for every single parent that wants to opt their kid out of a specific topic that could occur many times in a class, and have an evaluation process to determine if it's reasonable or not, PLUS the infrastructure to inform every parent when something specific is coming up in every class..
And reasonable to whom? If the parent is making the case obviously it's reasonable to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
Now you obviously believe that rejecting the evolution theory is unreasonable and ignorant.
|
Ignorant is a good word yes, because it's typically due to a lack of knowledge and comprehension. Which education remedies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
The thing is there is thousands of parents in Alberta and across this country that would disagree with you.
|
So? The whole point of a public education system with an established curriculum is to give every kid a foundation to work from despite any limitations a parent might have. Kids shouldn't be hindered by their parents' ignorance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
The volume of parents who hold this position and obviously do so for thought out reasons suggest they pass the reasonable test. They should be respected even if you don't agree.
|
It may suggest that to you, but it doesn't pass the "reasonable test", that's a foolish thing to propose. At any given moment, whatever anyone thinks is the most reasonable thing to them. If that was an effective measure or instrument, no one would ever change their mind or realize they were wrong.
In the case of evolution, I have yet to meet someone who rejects it for thought out reasons. The two most common reasons I find are lack of understanding of what evolution actually says, and "believed out reasons", or rejecting it not based on any understanding but simply out of the misguided belief that evolution contradicts the Bible or that it says there's no God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
It is not reasonable to allow the majority or the government to interfer with the rights of the individual.
|
Sure it is, that's the whole point of governments and laws, is to limit peoples' rights when appropriate, appropriate being defined by society. The discussion is about what's appropriate.
(This is an amusing comment when the government's ability to interfere with the rights of an individual are exactly what's desired by groups trying to, oh, restrict homosexuals from marrying or people getting abortions.. it's ok for the government to limit rights as long as those limitations are ones that one agree's with
)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
No I'm suggesting that you respect these parent's choices just like your Alberta government has. Don't blow this out of proportion. I'll wager these children won't have any problems passing their exams without this instruction.
|
Sure but there'll always be the borderline cases.. the kid who would have gotten 80% but missed the chapter on evolution so got 75% overall, and couldn't get into University as a result. Plus the complexity this introduces. If there's a further chilling effect remains to be seen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
History isn't science either. Science observes the natural world. Science can't observe history. All that science can do is observe what is here and make educated guesses about what happened before. History is subjective and easily manipulated. Take a Jehovah Witness, a Catholic, and a Baptist and ask them to each explain the development of the Doctrine of the Trinity historically and you will get three very different answers that sight the exact same historical evidence.
|
Science can observe the products of history, and apply the exact same reasoning, standards of evidence, processes, methodologies, statistics, etc that are useful in science to history.
Of course if I ask a layperson about it I'll get different answers.. heck I could ask 3 baptists and get 3 different answers.
If I ask 3 historical scholars who's area of expertise covers that area I'll get far less variance between the answers, and I'll also get an overview of all the relevant considerations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
In Alberta the government has afforded a third option of notification which will keep more of these students in public school. Apparently they see that as good for these kids.
|
Or they are just giving special treatment to a group of people who are important for them to maintain their power and don't think the negative impact will be significant.
In practice I don't think the negative impact on kids will be all that significant really, kids being raised ignorant are going to be raised that way regardless of this. It just adds more work for teachers and the system.
Why can't they just send home the outline of the curriculum for the year and be done with it? Better yet, put it online.