It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Virginia high school banned “To Kill a Mockingbird” “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”

page: 19
70
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: xcavscout

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Jdennis10
a reply to: DBCowboy

Here a quote from the book. To me this is just meaning we all all humans. Some people would read this the wrong way in their head.



Some negroes lie, some are immoral, some negro men are not be trusted around women - black and white. But this is a truth that applies to the human race and to no particular race of men. Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird (To Kill a Mockingbird #1)


There is zero reason to even suggest separation like this to a child. Or to bring back words no longer used in common conversation.

Some negroes lie, some are immoral, some negro men are not be trusted around women - black and white.


I can appreciate your concern and you have every right to do as you please. But, taking a statement out of context to try and win an argument is really a weak hand.

"Some negroes lie, some are immoral, some negro men are not be trusted around women - black and white. But this is a truth that applies to the human race and to no particular race of men. Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird (To Kill a Mockingbird #1)"

How is there a suggestion of separation when the first statement is responded to by the second, suggesting that there is no separation because there is clearly a HUMAN RACE problem? As we read classic literature the author was using a common word used in that time, but the statement was in no way singling out a race. It only looks that way if the context is removed, as you did when you quoted.



You want your kid to read that. Go ahead.

You honestly believe a kid is going to take in the whole meaning?



edit on 5-12-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Martin75

That's okay. I said I would remember this thread when the sex ed subject is brought up in the future. I've been here 5 years, and it pops up from time to time. I recognize the posters who are against it. They know who they are.


I am not against sex ed. I am against what some people think it is and at what age they think it should be taught.


I think Age Appropriate applies to all of this.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

The mistakes of the past still get made because people refuse to learn the lessons being taught to them by history, not because they did not read it in the first place. There should be no choice in the matter, stern consequence for taking barbarian attitudes toward ones fellow man, absolute zero tolerance for repeating past mistakes.

This species needs to make new ones. It starts with the words written by people who lived through the darkest times, that is where one learns what must not be tolerated, what cannot be permitted to flourish, what is and is not legitimate.

Without these guiding words, these lines in the sand that are known, and known well to be such a thing, there is no reason to expect civility, there is no method of bringing about peace, accord, unity between people. All there is, without those words, without that road map to work from, is a morality far too malleable and amorphous for a simple mind, the majority of minds, to grasp.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Well I just had my 11 year old read that, and he explained exactly what it meant. No coaching even needed.

So yea. They can.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xcavscout

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Jdennis10
a reply to: DBCowboy

Here a quote from the book. To me this is just meaning we all all humans. Some people would read this the wrong way in their head.



Some negroes lie, some are immoral, some negro men are not be trusted around women - black and white. But this is a truth that applies to the human race and to no particular race of men. Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird (To Kill a Mockingbird #1)


There is zero reason to even suggest separation like this to a child. Or to bring back words no longer used in common conversation.

Some negroes lie, some are immoral, some negro men are not be trusted around women - black and white.


I can appreciate your concern and you have every right to do as you please. But, taking a statement out of context to try and win an argument is really a weak hand.

"Some negroes lie, some are immoral, some negro men are not be trusted around women - black and white. But this is a truth that applies to the human race and to no particular race of men. Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird (To Kill a Mockingbird #1)"

How is there a suggestion of separation when the first statement is responded to by the second, suggesting that there is no separation because there is clearly a HUMAN RACE problem? As we read classic literature the author was using a common word used in that time, but the statement was in no way singling out a race. It only looks that way if the context is removed, as you did when you quoted.



You want your kid to read that. Go ahead.

You honestly believe a kid is going to take in the whole meaning?




I did not discuss my children at all so that is moot. Yes, I do believe that any child who has the comprehension skills to read at this level can comprehend the full statement. The only way they should not is if they put the book down right after they read what you quoted and never pick it up again, which in turn gives a false context, therefore a false meaning.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Pandaram

TO REMEMBER the wrongs done .WE are a harder people,founded on Conquest and 200 and someodd years YOUNG.
WE ARE KIDS to you,rowdy people down the way WRAPPED in chaos,we shouldn't EVER forget our wrongs,it's done WAY too much to hide guilt.

ISIS are enemies we are at COMBAT as a people with, a people with a SCARY second amendment.
WE won't allow a whole class of unmentionables but we lack the cohesiveness to care for our outcasts as we should.


PACIFISM isn't serving YOU people all that well...
edit on 5-12-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

HAVE YOU SEEN how quick TINY children are to learn concepts these days?
SHAME we send them to school and kill that...



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Martin75

That's okay. I said I would remember this thread when the sex ed subject is brought up in the future. I've been here 5 years, and it pops up from time to time. I recognize the posters who are against it. They know who they are.


I am not against sex ed. I am against what some people think it is and at what age they think it should be taught.


Like I said, every parent has their own line in the sand.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Old enough to kill people, but not old enough to kill a mockingbird.

Interesting.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Annee

HAVE YOU SEEN how quick TINY children are to learn concepts these days?
SHAME we send them to school and kill that...


I'm on my 3rd generation of kid raising. Pretty sure I'm aware by now.

We also live in a society.

I was raised without rules. I know how hard that can make it on being part of society.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I did it from 16 on...I never really wanted to.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Jesus.

They're starting the book burnings !!

What's next ?



Oh you know what's next. Especially after burning books.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Annee

I did it from 16 on...I never really wanted to.


I think its very hard to live in this world if you aren't taught the skills to do so.

But, those skills do not have to take away your personal freedom and creative mind.

You just can't let it own you.

I will always be thankful I was raised free and to be a free thinker. I never had to "unlearn" anything. I did have to learn to follow rules in the work force.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: xcavscout
Yes, I do believe that any child who has the comprehension skills to read at this level can comprehend the full statement.


And there's the "key".



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
I fully supported the Classics - - - until I ran into a personal issue. (I feel like Dr. Spock and his personal experience with his acquired teen aged step-daughter)

Personal experience can change the mind of even the most Open of an Open Mind.

This was a Hardy Boys book.

I was reading it to my 8 year old boy.

When it got to "house boy", "slave", and the "n-word" - - - I moved to a different book.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

His best friends are black, Chinese, Native American, and Egyptian. He, for some unknown reason, gravitates toward "people of color".

He has told us his real name is not what we gave him, but from before he was born. Who knows?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I have changed my mind on this because of personal experience.

I now support "modified Classics" for school age children. Probably even through high school.






Ridiculous. I wish I had more to offer but this post literally almost made me laugh out loud. Surely you don't actually believe what you posted? It's asinine on so many levels. Of course it's your opinion but good Lord, they need to start posting missing spines on milk cartons because this is pathetic.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Anathros

originally posted by: Annee
I fully supported the Classics - - - until I ran into a personal issue. (I feel like Dr. Spock and his personal experience with his acquired teen aged step-daughter)

Personal experience can change the mind of even the most Open of an Open Mind.

This was a Hardy Boys book.

I was reading it to my 8 year old boy.

When it got to "house boy", "slave", and the "n-word" - - - I moved to a different book.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

His best friends are black, Chinese, Native American, and Egyptian. He, for some unknown reason, gravitates toward "people of color".

He has told us his real name is not what we gave him, but from before he was born. Who knows?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I have changed my mind on this because of personal experience.

I now support "modified Classics" for school age children. Probably even through high school.






Ridiculous. I wish I had more to offer but this post literally almost made me laugh out loud. Surely you don't actually believe what you posted? It's asinine on so many levels. Of course it's your opinion but good Lord, they need to start posting missing spines on milk cartons because this is pathetic.


Feel free to expose your kids to anything you want, by any means - - books, media, movies, whatever.

I will Choose for mine.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 10:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Annee

HAVE YOU SEEN how quick TINY children are to learn concepts these days?
SHAME we send them to school and kill that...



I'm on my 3rd generation of kid raising. Pretty sure I'm aware by now.

We also live in a society.

I was raised without rules. I know how hard that can make it on being part of society.


I was raised without rules as well. Many of my friends were raised with strict rules. I never had any problems in the workforce. Some of my friends did, some didn't. Many of my friends with really strict rules went absolutely nuts when they became young adults. Drinking, drugs, etc etc. I had already been introduced to all of that much earlier, and didn't have the same issues.

Your GRANDchild will grow up not knowing how people are, if you shelter them. It will be a huge shock to the kid when they become a young adult, and enter a world full of hatred. People like that get eaten alive once they hit the real world. I've seen it hundreds of times.

I would much prefer to prepare my children for the messed up world they will enter.

Of course, assuming you have custody, or some type of agreement, it's your right to raise your grandchild however you want (within reason, but I don't see you as someone who would abuse their child, it's obvious you're filled with an overabundance of love for the child) but simply because one has the right to do something, doesn't make them doing it intelligent.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Well, I can't say I'm surprised by those who endorse and want to promote censorship.


Those people will never change their minds DBCowboy... To them any excuse is ok to ban, and get rid of what THEY don't agree with, but they can't see that's the making of authoritarianism.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Well, I can't say I'm surprised by those who endorse and want to promote censorship.


You'd prefer promoting hatred and prejudice - - - that we've fought hard to evolve from?

Children don't need it.


You read to kill a mocking bird and came away with the idea that it promoted hatred and prejudice?

That's weird, because when I read it in high school i fully understood the context and came away with the complete opposite feeling. I thought to kill a mocking bird offered great examples of doing whats right despite possible repercussions, it explained why we shouldn't be prejudice. Not only did we read the book, we also watched the movie, this double dose of exposure to it didn't make me want to be racist. I empathized with people who suffered through out the book.

I couldn't disagree with you more that kids don't need it. High school kids are fully capable of processing the context of these books, and they should be exposed to challenging ideas. To kill a mocking bird is exactly the type of book they should be reading!
edit on 12pm11pm312016-12-05T23:55:03-06:0011America/Chicago by mahatche because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: mahatche

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Well, I can't say I'm surprised by those who endorse and want to promote censorship.


You'd prefer promoting hatred and prejudice - - - that we've fought hard to evolve from?

Children don't need it.


You read to kill a mocking bird and came away with the idea that it promoted hatred and prejudice?

. . . when I read it in high school i fully understood the context and came away with the complete opposite feeling. I thought to kill a mocking bird offered great examples of doing whats right despite possible repercussions, it explained why we shouldn't be prejudice.


Then I guess it was the right time for you.



new topics

top topics



 
70
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join