Age-inappropriate information in schools?

[poolerboy0077]

To many Christians, divorce is a sin as well as a rejection of their specific faith. There are many teachers who are allowed the religious liberty of wearing religious paraphernalia and attire, such as cross pendants around their necks or hijabs around their heads. Many teachers are also married or about to be married and often share limited details about their marriage to establish rapport and reveal a more human side with their students, which is an effective tool for teaching. Of course even if one didn't go out of one's way to reveal information, the mere presence of religious attire or accessories, or the fact that a divorced female teacher will now be referred by her maiden name, reveals enough information to tip students off or to make them inquisitive.

The question I want to ask is whether any of this is considered age-inappropriate information to reveal to students. Is it even appropriate to allow teachers the liberty to express quietly by displaying religious crosses/hijabs/turbans in public schools despite that their very displays might make cause children ask questions about their own faith and learn about others contrary to the beliefs and values they were taught at home?

 

[ForJesusChrist]

There is nothing wrong with wearing a cross around your neck.

 

[BL2KTN]

Both the marital status and religious beliefs of a teacher are acceptable pieces of information for students to know. Proselytizing is not appropriate.

 

[poolerboy0077]

There is nothing wrong with wearing a cross around your neck.

And I guess you would say the same for a hijab or a turban.

But what about when children inquire as to what these objects are and mean? Would it be appropriate to give them an honest answer?


You also omitted your opinion on the disclosure of divorced status, such as having a female teacher now being called by her maiden name (the reason being that she no longer carries her husband's family name).

 

[GenetoJean]

And I guess you would say the same for a hijab or a turban.

But what about when children inquire what these objects are and mean? Would it be appropriate to give them an honest answer?

Yes, it would. An honest answer would be to simply explain that it is a symbol of the teachers religion. At some point, if the student keeps asking questions, the teacher should tell the student they should ask their parents or get the parents permision to go in deeper detail after school sometime.

I would give the same answer for a hijab, turban, wican star, jewish star, cross, crucifix, buddah, or any other of the numerous religious paraphenalia.

 

[ForJesusChrist]

But what about when children inquire as to what these objects are and mean? Would it be appropriate to give them an honest answer?

It would be more than appropriate. Why would there even be a need to lie about it? It is the truth and the reason there are so many shootings and rebellious kids nowadays is because kids are not taught the about the truths and hardness of life, they expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter and I can tell you it is NOT this way for anyone.

There would be no reason to lie about it, just tell them the truth.

God Bless

 

[GenetoJean]

And I guess you would say the same for a hijab or a turban.

But what about when children inquire as to what these objects are and mean? Would it be appropriate to give them an honest answer?


You also omitted your opinion on the disclosure of divorced status, such as having a female teacher now being called by her maiden name (the reason being that she no longer carries her husband's family name).

Oh, the divorce thing would be a more delicate matter and should be explained with as little informationas possible and passing the child to the parent sooner.

 

[poolerboy0077]

It would be more than appropriate. Why would there even be a need to lie about it? It is the truth and the reason there are so many shootings and rebellious kids nowadays is because kids are not taught the about the truths and hardness of life, they expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter and I can tell you it is NOT this way for anyone.

There would be no reason to lie about it, just tell them the truth.

God Bless

And sexual orientation?

Oh, the divorce thing would be a more delicate matter and should be explained with as little informationas possible and passing the child to the parent sooner.

All I mean is communicating to the child the status of divorce, not about the details of it.

So, for instance, if someone changed their last name back to their maiden name, naturally children will ask why they have to call their teacher by a new name. The reason in this scenario is because said teacher is now divorced. Let's say the kid also asks, "But why did you get divorced?" If the teacher responds only by saying, "I won't give you details but I'll tell you that it's because sometimes relationships don't always work out." Would that be a satisfactory answer to you?

 

[GenetoJean]

And sexual orientation?


All I mean is communicating to the child the status of divorce, not about the details of it.

So, for instance, if someone changed their last name back to their maiden name, naturally children will ask why they have to call their teacher by a new name. The reason in this scenario is because said teacher is now divorced. Let's say the kid also asks, "But why did you get divorced?" If the teacher responds only by saying, "I won't give you details but I'll tell you that it's because sometimes relationships don't always work out." Would that be a satisfactory answer to you?

It would to me.

 

[ForJesusChrist]

And sexual orientation?

Yes, as I said I don't believe in lying.

 

[poolerboy0077]

Yes, as I said I don't believe in lying.

Fair enough.

I only ask because I have come across many people, usually people of faith, who object to such disclosures of status, especially regarding sexual orientation. I'd be curious to see if many on here share your views on the subject as well (i.e., with respect to religious affiliation, divorce status and sexual orientation status). These issues I'm sure are bound to come up and I suspect not everybody would be alright with it.

 

[ForJesusChrist]

Well if you are a Christian you must be against lying at all costs, even when its hard.

God Bless

 

[poolerboy0077]

Well if you are a Christian you must be against lying at all costs, even when its hard.

Hmm. I wasn't expecting that rationale as the reason for your response. You said at all costs. By that I take it to mean you are an absolutist when it comes to this value? Are you a deontologist when it comes to ethics? Suppose a friend is hiding in the broom closet trying to avoid being captured by a person who wants to kill her. Said attempted killer comes to you and asks, "Do you know where your mother is?" Do you lie and tell that person to go looking elsewhere so your mother can make a getaway or do you double-down on your conviction to be against lying "at all costs" and divulge the truth about where she's hiding? A strict deontologist would chose the latter. I would chose the former because I am a consequentialist and I care about outcome and the impacts behaviors have on others.

 

[ForJesusChrist]

Hmm. I wasn't expecting that rationale as the reason for your response. You said at all costs. By that I take it to mean you are an absolutist when it comes to this value? Are you a deontologist when it comes to ethics? Suppose a friend is hiding in the broom closet trying to avoid being captured by a person who wants to kill her. Said attempted killer comes to you and asks, "Do you know where your mother is?" Do you lie and tell that person to go looking elsewhere so your mother can make a getaway or do you double-down on your conviction to be against lying "at all costs" and divulge the truth about where she's hiding? A strict deontologist would chose the latter. I would chose the former because I am a consequentialist and I care about outcome and the impacts behaviors have on others.

Too many big and fancy words, but to say the least, I try my best to never lie. But then again, we are all human and not perfect.

 

[poolerboy0077]

Too many big and fancy words, but to say the least, I try my best to never lie. But then again, we are all human and not perfect.

I'll simplify it then:

If your mother is trying to hide from a bad guy who's trying to kill her, you know where she's hiding (let's say, in the broom closet), the bad guy comes to you and asks where she is, do you: a) tell the bad guy the truth (and thus have your mother killed) or b) lie and save your mother?

The point of that scenario is to see how far you're willing to go with the "at all costs" way of thinking.

 

[Arcangl86]

Divorce is rather tricky I think, though with many woman using their maiden names professionally, I'm not sure how often it would come up. Symbol of religious faith on the other hand, I think is pretty clear cute. That is something that is really common and that the kids are likely to see on the streets.

 

[juvenissun]

To many Christians, divorce is a sin as well as a rejection of their specific faith. There are many teachers who are allowed the religious liberty of wearing religious paraphernalia and attire, such as cross pendants around their necks or hijabs around their heads. Many teachers are also married or about to be married and often share limited details about their marriage to establish rapport and reveal a more human side with their students, which is an effective tool for teaching. Of course even if one didn't go out of one's way to reveal information, the mere presence of religious attire or accessories, or the fact that a divorced female teacher will now be referred by her maiden name, reveals enough information to tip students off or to make them inquisitive.

The question I want to ask is whether any of this is considered age-inappropriate information to reveal to students. Is it even appropriate to allow teachers the liberty to express quietly by displaying religious crosses/hijabs/turbans in public schools despite that their very displays might make cause children ask questions about their own faith and learn about others contrary to the beliefs and values they were taught at home?

If you are in power, you can ban or allow anything be taught in any level of school. No reason is needed.

So, instead of reasoning to death, I suggest people to save the energy and use it to grab the power.

 

[znr]

To put it another way, would you consider what Corrie Ten Boom did to be sinful?

Too many big and fancy words, but to say the least, I try my best to never lie. But then again, we are all human and not perfect.

 

[ForJesusChrist]

To put it another way, would you consider what Corrie Ten Boom did to be sinful?

Yes and no. She saved many lives, but she also committed the sin of lying.

 

[poolerboy0077]

Yes and no. She saved many lives, but she also committed the sin of lying.

I suspect that you'd choose option A in my hypothetical:

I'll simplify it then:

If your mother is trying to hide from a bad guy who's trying to kill her, you know where she's hiding (let's say, in the broom closet), the bad guy comes to you and asks where she is, do you: a) tell the bad guy the truth (and thus have your mother killed) or b) lie and save your mother?

The point of that scenario is to see how far you're willing to go with the "at all costs" way of thinking.