Subscriber Login



Forgot Your Username?
Forgot Your Password?
Patriots meeting on sex ed brought community together PDF Print E-mail

Dear Editor:

Tuesday night, April 8,  there was a well-attended meeting of the Northwoods Patriots, a group of which I am a member. We invited a guest speaker, Julianne Appling from Wisconsin Family Action, to talk about the human growth and development class offered by most Wisconsin schools.

This was the result of a recent controversy with respect to a take-home assignment at Northland Pines High School which some parents felt was age inappropriate and did not adequately address all available choices.

Top school officials were in attendance, including the district administrator, Northland Pines High School principal, president of the school board and teachers. The guest speaker was extremely knowledgeable and informative, and while her personal view was not necessarily shared by all the people in attendance, she was clear when expressing facts versus her opinion.

As it turns out, our high school does fall short of certain statutory requirements, which the school officials who spoke expressed an eagerness to rectify.

With respect to the aforementioned assignment, the school officials were receptive to the feedback and pledged to effect modifications, including sending such sensitive assignments to parents in advance, allowing an opportunity for feedback and to prepare their child, or to opt-out their child from the assignment or class.

What I feel the subtext of this meeting was is this. Tuesday evening was a commendable example of “civics in action.” Everyone in attendance was respectful, polite, considerate, nonconfrontatinal and ready to find a common ground to the benefit of the children, and I believe to the ultimate benefit of our community.

I would like to extend my appreciation to the Northwoods Patriots for organizing this event and inviting the informative Ms. Appling to speak, and also to the various school officials, who by attending showed their understanding that they serve the citizens and to us that they sincerely wish to do so.

Tuesday evening we came together as a community and I am proud of this.

Joseph Schwartz

Eagle River

Tuesday, May 06, 2014 9:46 AM
 

Comments  

 
-9 #21 Frank Gabl 2014-05-14 10:12
John,

I don't have much to add to your reasonable response, except, regardless of what some kids think and are allowed to act upon, others do not since they are guided by parents who rear them differently.

Ultimately, responsibility falls on the shoulders of the parents or guardians - as it should.

And that was the reason for, and outcome of the meeting - to follow state law and guidelines.
Quote
 
 
+6 #20 2014-05-14 05:55
Not much else to say Frank. As I said, this assignment has been in place a LONG time and if anyone looks at it honestly it asks very honest questions. If you think these questions are "perverted" or "kinky" that's your opinion but the facts are that kids ARE having sex at this age and YOUNGER and need to be asked these questions. As for the school, yes...I believe they merely pandered to this fringe "group". I have been critical of this board and especially the incompetent administrators and if they didn't follow guidelines they should be held accountable, NOT this teacher who was merely doing her job. I am not telling you what you should think, but rather saying the kids ALREADY think and talk about having sex and we need provide as much information as possible. These kids are much more evolved than you give them credit for. Sugar coating or brushing these conversations under the table because they are uncomfortable is ignorant and hurts the students.
Quote
 
 
-10 #19 Frank Gabl 2014-05-13 13:04
John,

Any reasonable person would consider your last response meaningless since you did not address even one issue or question that I raised.

Maybe it finally sunk in that all kids are different and no one knows them better than their own parents who have the final say in what they're taught regardless of what elitists believe.

And as a parent and grandparent I'm more in tune with what is going on than you may think. My argument with you stems from you telling me what I should think.

That job is mine.
Quote
 
 
+7 #18 2014-05-13 12:26
Keep living your sheltered life Frank, the world has passed you by. With teens "sexting" and HAVING sex at earlier and earlier ages to avoid having open and honest discussions and question merely equates to "flat earth" syndrome.
Quote
 
 
-5 #17 Frank Gabl 2014-05-12 22:19
John,

Only a fringe member of a community, acting out of sheer political expediency, would distort the outcome of the compromise between NP and the concerned parents in attendance as, “A school board caving into a few members of a fringe group,” considering the fact that this highly respected public high school ranks 33 out of 485 in WI, as well as, an even 2000 out of more than 31,000 nationwide – making it impenetrable to the will of only “a few” people.

However, when a school district faces the real possibility of a lawsuit for disregarding “statutory requirements,” school officials usually “express an eagerness” to comply as Joe reported: “The school officials were receptive to the feedback and pledged to effect modifications, including sending such sensitive assignments to parents in advance, allowing an opportunity for feedback and to prepare their child, or to opt-out their child from the assignment or class.”

Cont. below:
Quote
 
 
-5 #16 Frank Gabl 2014-05-12 22:11
Continued:

Nevertheless, the following statement of yours really illustrates the silly and elitist thinking of the fringe Left, “You can label the question perverted, kinky or whatever you choose, it's a valid question to any teen that is contemplating sex.”

So that begs the following questions:

1) Are you not aware, that since the maturity level of the typical 15-year-old ranges anywhere from 13-17, a mandatory one-size-fits-all policy, which includes the question, “Am I comfortable being naked with my partner and with seeing my partner naked,” is not only ignorant, but can be mentally harmful to those behind the curve?

2) And what gives a school district the right to impose their will over that of the tax-paying parents?
Quote
 
 
+8 #15 2014-05-12 15:42
A school board caving into a few members of a fringe group is not a majority. It's that simple Frank and you won't back up anything you say because you can't. You believe that no others, especially a majority, would have a different view than what this far right fringe group believes. You can label the question perverted, kinky o whatever you choose, it's a valid question to any teen that is contemplating sex. In fact, IF you knew what teens ACTUALLY were thinking I bet you would be shocked.
Quote
 
 
-6 #14 Frank Gabl 2014-05-12 14:11
John,

It is obvious from the results of the meeting, as well as Northland Pine's cooperation, that as far as THIS COMMUNITY goes, you are in fact one of its fringe members even though you're having a hard time coming to grips with it - not the other way around as you erroneously portray.

And it is not incumbent on me to prove anything since that was taken care of at the meeting between Northland Pines and those in attendance.

The burden of proof now is on you, so start proving.

"Kinky" is merely a synonym of "perverted" and also describes the question asked of a 15-year-old child, "Am I comfortable being naked with my partner and with seeing my partner naked."
Quote
 
 
+7 #13 2014-05-12 10:51
Now it's "kinky"? You and your fringe group are living in the dark ages. Teens are doing many things you would never even comprehend they do in this day and age. The only ones that have "rejected" the assignment are the small minority in this area that belong to the same far right mentality. Maybe you could show where the MAJORITY of the community believes the way you do. The questions are honest questions that a teen should be thinking about and part of a COMPREHENSIVE program.
Quote
 
 
-8 #12 Frank Gabl 2014-05-12 07:12
John,

As you are well aware, of course you didn’t make yourself clear on the first attempt meant to deflect, since you intentionally left off the controversial part of the question until you had no other choice. And then in typical deceptive fashion, you just slipped it in as though you had referenced the controversial part of the sex ed question in the first place.

So the only logical conclusion that one can reach – pertaining to those who support such a kinky question being posed to 15-year-old children to ponder - “Am I comfortable being naked with my partner and with seeing my partner naked” - is that they do not reason like normal-thinking people who overwhelmingly consider the question to be age inappropriate and perverted.

Cont. below:
Quote
 

Add comment

Comments exceeding 1,000 characters will not be accepted. Please refrain from using texting language and spell out all words. All comments are reviewed and must be approved before they are posted.


Security code
Refresh