A little foreshadowing?

[LittleWyvern]

OK, OK I think Family Celebration Day is a good idea, too. But it WAS homosexuals who threw cold water on the Mother's Day and Father's Day events at this school.

So now that this itsy bitsy percentage of people who deliberately choose to live their lives in an out of ordinary way ( which in my opinion is not a valid choice when considering the needs of children) go and upset the apple cart for everyone else. Another example of the selfishness behind this whole agenda. Is this foreshadowing of what will happen in the states if it's not happening already? As we know, Canada is much more advanced.

I can see what you're worried about, that homosexuals are out to destroy "well grounded" cultural traditions and Mother's day is next up on the target list, but let's consider a few things first before concluding things:

• This is one school in Canada. Mother's Day is still an official federal holiday in the US and never was an official federal holiday in Canada (but is still well observed).
• Considering how commercialized Mother's Day is, I don't see how much we can say it represents cultural traditions (with my sincerest apologies to Ms. Jarvis, of course: I'm not trying to cheapen Mother's Day, instead I'm recognizing it for what it is).
• You're talking about this as if homosexuals have banned saying the word "mother" or something. This is one school in one place in Canada where the concepts of Mother's Day and Father's Day have been combined into a sort of Family Day. That's it. I suppose we could also have, as a new federal holiday, "Parents and Legal Guardians Day" but I don't think it would sell cards quite as well.

Edited June 18, 2013 by LittleWyvern
Wow, I really need to proofread my posts or something

[MorningStar]

So because homosexuals intentionally robbed their children of having a mother and a father, these holidays are supposed to be ruined for heterosexuals? Ridiculous. Why haven't we been so sensitive all this time to children whose mothers died and that sort of thing. Oh no, the children whose parents decided to rent someone's uterus or buy someone's sperm should be catered to more than anyone!

[LittleWyvern]

So because homosexuals intentionally robbed their children of having a mother and a father, these holidays are supposed to be ruined for heterosexuals? Ridiculous. Why haven't we been so sensitive all this time to children whose mothers died and that sort of thing. Oh no, the children whose parents decided to rent someone's uterus or buy someone's sperm should be catered to more than anyone!

I think we need to back up from the homosexuality thing for a minute and get a better picture of what exactly the "International Day of Families" holiday (which this school is using to replace Mother's Day and Father's Day) is.

Families hold societies together, and intergenerational relationships extend this legacy over time. This year’s International Day of Families is an occasion to celebrate connections among all members of the constellation that makes up a family. It is also an opportunity to reflect on how they are affected by social and economic trends – and what we can do to strengthen families in response.

Take a look at the picture on that page as well: a boy with his grandfather. Forgetting for a moment the controversy over the specific school, this sounds like a holiday anybody can get behind, and I think that was the point. What I don't understand is how celebrating mothers and fathers (and grandfathers and grandmothers and...) all at the same time somehow "ruins" honoring mothers and fathers compared to celebrating mothers and fathers separately. Now, I'm fine with celebrating these separately (and because Mother's Day is a official federal holiday in the US I'm confident that they will always remain separate in the US), but I don't see how combining them into one holiday makes the point of both holidays (honoring mothers and fathers) any less effective.

[carlimac]

I think we need to back up from the homosexuality thing for a minute and get a better picture of what exactly the "International Day of Families" holiday (which this school is using to replace Mother's Day and Father's Day) is.

Take a look at the picture on that page as well: a boy with his grandfather. Forgetting for a moment the controversy over the specific school, this sounds like a holiday anybody can get behind, and I think that was the point. What I don't understand is how celebrating mothers and fathers (and grandfathers and grandmothers and...) all at the same time somehow "ruins" honoring mothers and fathers compared to celebrating mothers and fathers separately. Now, I'm fine with celebrating these separately (and because Mother's Day is a official federal holiday in the US I'm confident that they will always remain separate in the US), but I don't see how combining them into one holiday makes the point of both holidays (honoring mothers and fathers) any less effective.

It's an OK idea in and of itself. But to replace the individuality and uniqueness of what a mother brings to a family with this generic "family" is to dilute the importance of the role of a mother. Same goes for the father's role being downplayed and nebulized when we go to these lengths to not offend someone without a mom or a dad. Fact is everyone needs a mother and father figure in their lives. On Mother's Day the teacher could just say to little Billy without a mom, make this card for some lady in your life who is special to you. Same for little Sally without a Dad. " I'll bet there is a man in your life (grandpa, uncle, neighbor) who you really like a lot. I'll bet he would love to get a card from you." In this way we can still honor the biological fact that both men and women are needed to make a child, but also point out that if your dad has passed away or you don't know who your dad is, them's the breaks ( reality!!) but there are other people in your life who are there to support you.

By replacing Mothers and Fathers with "Family" we are trying too hard to blur the lines, to make sure no kid ever gets the idea that the stupid adults in his life might have created this situation. No one is ever to blame. Anything goes, relativism. Lesbians and Gays are totally legit and if my kid doesn't have a Dad, well I"ll just make sure the world changes it's way of thinking because the world owes it to me.

[carlimac]

One more thought. I believe most kids are far more resilient than we give them credit for, or let them demonstrate. In the process of trying sooooo hard to protect them from reality, from what IS, we're turning them into wimps and woosies who won't be able to handle reality as adults. We're creating this psycho generation of kids who think everything has to go their way or someone else will have to pay or bend their rules and standards. It's a shame.

[LittleWyvern]

It's an OK idea in and of itself. But to replace the individuality and uniqueness of what a mother brings to a family with this generic "family" is to dilute the importance of the role of a mother.

I disagree here, because I don't think that celebrating both fathers and mothers (and grandparents) in the same holiday somehow reduces the family to some amorphous grey blob. As I understand it, this holiday tries to recognize all the members that make up the family that we live with and stay in contact with, even if it's a kid that lives with an aunt/uncle. There's more people in this crowd of "people we're honoring" now, but I don't think that makes anybody in it less important or visible.

Now, don't misunderstand me here: I'm not defending this holiday because I disagree with the concept of having a Mother's Day and a Father's Day. I like those two holidays, and I don't think we should change them to be this combined holiday. All I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't be so quick to toss away this holiday as some sort of gay/lesbian relativism attack that turns kids into wimps/psychos (I'm not sure which one of those you meant). Especially now, any holiday that is aimed toward honoring and supporting families seems to me like something that should at least be viewed positively.

Same goes for the father's role being downplayed and nebulized when we go to these lengths to not offend someone without a mom or a dad. Fact is everyone needs a mother and father figure in their lives. On Mother's Day the teacher could just say to little Billy without a mom, make this card for some lady in your life who is special to you. Same for little Sally without a Dad. " I'll bet there is a man in your life (grandpa, uncle, neighbor) who you really like a lot. I'll bet he would love to get a card from you." In this way we can still honor the biological fact that both men and women are needed to make a child, but also point out that if your dad has passed away or you don't know who your dad is, them's the breaks ( reality!!) but there are other people in your life who are there to support you.

I'm not entirely sure how honoring biology or emphasizing that a child's parents may have passed away or are gone are sufficient and necessary conditions to honoring parents. They're part of the experience, of course, but not mandatory. You may consider this hiding, but acknowledging that some things are optional is much different than hiding something. In other words, we can be sensitive to different family situations (and thus know when it may be a good time to discuss things explicitly and when it may not be) without trying to hide reality. If anything, a combined holiday makes it easier to include the idea of mother and father figures, making the scenarios you've created easier to talk about.

By replacing Mothers and Fathers with "Family"

Although I know you've emphasized "replacing," I don't see how mothers and fathers are not implied in the word family (and thus the word should be "including"). You speak as if the word family somehow hides the concept of mother and father, but I disagree with that. When I use the word family, it's implicit that I'm talking about my Mom and Dad, and perhaps other people depending on the context (maybe my Grandma, maybe a cousin, etc.). "Family" does include more people, but I don't think we have to restrict ourselves to just mother and father to honor them.

we are trying too hard to blur the lines, to make sure no kid ever gets the idea that the stupid adults in his life might have created this situation. No one is ever to blame. Anything goes, relativism.

...

One more thought. I believe most kids are far more resilient than we give them credit for, or let them demonstrate. In the process of trying sooooo hard to protect them from reality, from what IS,

Again, this is the difference between "this isn't mandatory" and "hiding." I don't think pointing out the stupidity of adults in a child's life or blaming said adults (or others) is necessary, but I'm not arguing for hiding them either. Children should of course acknowledge reality and understand what they lack, but I don't think that's mandatory for honoring the parents/guardians that they do have.

[bytor2112]

Some of these events have the opportunity to encompass everyone, specifically, these children that don't fall under "traditional" or "conventional" family units. I think only good could come from acknowledging that there are more and more of these kids, and making some adjustments to INCLUDE THEM, is a great thing.

You assume that someone that is without a mother or father is somehow excluded. poor dears.....or that renaming the Father /Daughter dance doesn't exclude a much larger group or that those gals without dads don't already know and have adjusted to the fact without continuous amounts of pampering.

Why not stop trying to social engineer and let kids realize early..... that life is not fair or inclusive. Stop creating the mirage and they will not require prozac and uncle sam to care for them all of there lives. We are creating generations of whiny, weak, entitled people without backbones.

Edited June 19, 2013 by bytor2112

[carlimac]

Although I know you've emphasized "replacing," I don't see how mothers and fathers are not implied in the word family (and thus the word should be "including"). You speak as if the word family somehow hides the concept of mother and father, but I disagree with that. When I use the word family, it's implicit that I'm talking about my Mom and Dad, and perhaps other people depending on the context (maybe my Grandma, maybe a cousin, etc.). "Family" does include more people, but I don't think we have to restrict ourselves to just mother and father to honor them.

I'm not going to pick apart your whole post, partly because I don't know how to separate the paragraphs .

But I do have to say that although the word family implicitly includes any or all members of a family, there is a big difference in what we emphasize in honoring mothers and fathers. That's because mothers (women) are different than fathers(men) and there are differences in the way they interract with children. They characteristically nurture and teach different things to kids. With a "Family" Day it dulls and blurs the definition and roles that the two genders play in kids' lives. There is merit to a day to celebrate family but to me it would be a very different kind of celebration focusing on the family as a whole and not really honoring the distinct individuals.

[Bini]

You assume that someone that is without a mother or father is somehow excluded. poor dears.....

Why not stop trying to social engineer and let kids realize early that life is not fair or inclusive. Stop creating the mirage and they will not prozac and uncle sam to care for them all of there lives.

I assume nothing. I know that this is the case for many, including, some of my very own friends.

[carlimac]

Well, life just isn't fair. If we try too hard to make it fair, we turn ourselves into a celebrate nothing society.

[bytor2112]

So we need to eliminate the days that celebrate good mothers and fathers, so that no one feels left out? Let's also get rid of Christmas so the Buddhists and atheists and such don't feel bad. And I'm tired of hearing about Hannukah because it has nothing to do with me, so let's be rid of that, too.

Today is my daughter's birthday. Are we allowed to celebrate it even though it's not yours?

I know it's been said to death, but political correctness has gotten laughably ridiculous.

:clap::clap:

[bytor2112]

One more thought. I believe most kids are far more resilient than we give them credit for, or let them demonstrate. In the process of trying sooooo hard to protect them from reality, from what IS, we're turning them into wimps and woosies who won't be able to handle reality as adults. We're creating this psycho generation of kids who think everything has to go their way or someone else will have to pay or bend their rules and standards. It's a shame.

Indeed..it is on display. Perhaps this rejoiner from that thoughtful Geico therapist would be an appropriate retort to the diversity and tolerance PC addled youth:

"Maybe we should chug on over to mamby pamby land where maybe we can find some self confidence for you, you jack wagon!"

[Gretchen]

[skippy740]

'entertainning'? Not only is it boring, but it's has incorrect spelling! Let the outrage begin! lol

[Gretchen]

I "borrowed" this picture. I do not know how to correct the spelling.

you should see MY spelling sometime...

[prisonchaplain]

My thoughts are along the same lines.

I think rewording these Father/Daughter dances would be considerate too. Some girls don't have loving daddies to take them to these events but they may have some other adult male that they look up to as a father figure.

Can we not honor traditional parenting roles, and make allowances at the same time? Since I was a kid--and probably going back to Adam, children have grown up without one or both biological parents. Their "daddies or mommies" were often aunts, uncles, even a favored coach or teacher. It was still Mother's Day and Father's Day.

Maybe we should just admit defeat and get rid of biological allegiances. Forget Canada...let's follow NYC's advanced thinking, and just have Nanny Mayor's Day.

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4882841998131486&pid=1.7&w=279&h=135&c=7&rs=1

Edited June 19, 2013 by prisonchaplain

[prisonchaplain]

I know it's been said to death, but political correctness has gotten laughably ridiculous.

I used to laugh. Maybe I'm getting old and sentimental, but these days it is really starting grieve me.

[prisonchaplain]

I can address this.

Schools are melting pots with teachers and students with different cultures, faiths and upbringings. Making adjustments to INCLUDE everyone can be nothing but a positive. Many schools now celebrate "Holidays" and highlight a bit of everything. I know there are schools here in good ole Salt Lake City that do that now, so Christians, Jews and other faiths can feel apart instead of secluded.

What you choose to celebrate or believe in YOUR HOME is fine. It doesn't affect what I or anyone else does. And while I think the birthday analogy is irrelevant, I'll respond to it, most everyone can relate to having a "birthday" -- it's common. Not everyone can relate to having a traditional or conventional family, and that number is increasingly growing. Not sure why there's so much intense tension over this. Some tolerance for diversity and allowing change is a good thing.

I understand. But I disagree. Strongly. Tolerance does not mean the majority culture must assimulate into a vacuous ooze of nothingness, that respects all, but grants special appreciation to none. To honor mothers is not to dishonor guardians. To honor fathers is not to dishonor those who have none.

This foolish drive to make sure no one feels left out, by refusing to honor those who succeed, those who excel infuriates me. I still remember the year that my elementary school did away with 1st 2nd and 3rd place ribbons at Field Day. They were replaced with yellow participation ribbons. "Everyone's a winner!" At the end of the day the playground was almost completely covered with yellow ribbons. We of the transitional generation understood that not everyone is a winner. Only one wins. One comes in second. One comes in 3rd. Everyone else can try for their personal best, but why steal the honor of those who excelled?

Why steal the honor of those mothers who married smart, stuck it out, and raised their sons and daughters? Same for fathers? Again, kids adapt. Uncle Bob is my father--he fulfills that role. So, I make my Father's Day card for him.

[Gretchen]

I used to laugh. Maybe I'm getting old and sentimental, but these days it is really starting grieve me.

PC... I'm 20 and it's frustrating me too. Along with people's reactions in general. Case in point, the Cheerios commercial with the "mixed" family (that kid was cute, she had a typical young kid reaction to finding out Cheerios "help the heart")

People are just so easily offended these days. :sigh:

[Traveler]

Political correctness??? I do believe we should be careful about offending others. Rats! Now I must apologize for ticking off half of the posters and readers of this forum. Forgive me - I am sorry for offending anyone (including my being sorry for offending whoever that was offended). Also I am sorry to those that my being sorry and apologizing has offended.

The Traveler

[LittleWyvern]

Why not stop trying to social engineer and let kids realize early..... that life is not fair or inclusive. Stop creating the mirage and they will not require prozac and uncle sam to care for them all of there lives. We are creating generations of whiny, weak, entitled people without backbones.

Well, life just isn't fair. If we try too hard to make it fair, we turn ourselves into a celebrate nothing society.

"Maybe we should chug on over to mamby pamby land where maybe we can find some self confidence for you, you jack wagon!"

I know life isn't fair, but I'm worried about that fact being used as an excuse to not even try to be sensitive to people's needs/situations (and then call them all sorts of names). I think kids will develop backbones even if we try to be nice to them.

Can we not honor traditional parenting roles, and make allowances at the same time?

I think we can just fine. Like I said before, I'm not opposed in the slightest to having separate Mother's day and Father's day (I just don't think Family day is some sort of gay/lesbian apocalypse). I think making allowances as needed will satisfy the concerns of those worried about children feeling left out of Mother's/Father's day, but we won't help anything if we use "life isn't fair" to conclude that children are going to become whiny, weak, entitled, etc. if we try to make any allowances for them.

As a sidenote, I never knew that political correctness implied that you had to be nihilist.

[carlimac]

I know life isn't fair, but I'm worried about that fact being used as an excuse to not even try to be sensitive to people's needs/situations (and then call them all sorts of names). I think kids will develop backbones even if we try to be nice to them.

I think we can just fine. Like I said before, I'm not opposed in the slightest to having separate Mother's day and Father's day (I just don't think Family day is some sort of gay/lesbian apocalypse). I think making allowances as needed will satisfy the concerns of those worried about children feeling left out of Mother's/Father's day, but we won't help anything if we use "life isn't fair" to conclude that children are going to become whiny, weak, entitled, etc. if we try to make any allowances for them.

As a sidenote, I never knew that political correctness implied that you had to be nihilist.

But sometimes the way we try to "be nice" to kids (bend over backwards to make sure they don't get hurt or offended by anything) doesn't really help them. It actually weakens them.

[Bini]

Loff-able, absolutely loffable.

I feel you, LW.

[Traveler]

But sometimes the way we try to "be nice" to kids (bend over backwards to make sure they don't get hurt or offended by anything) doesn't really help them. It actually weakens them.

Everyone at some time in their life will need assistance - someone willing to help them get back on their feet.

I think what we want to get away from is helping someone that really does not care to stand on their own two feet from those that will indeed benefit and be more productive with some help. But there is one other catagory - those that cannot stand on their own regardless.

From a strict point of efficiency - if there is no possible benefit - it is likely not a good idea. But sometimes the only benefit possible is to the individual trying to help. Which leaves us with the thought - if we do not benefit by helping and the the person out of sorts does not benefit -- How can we say our efforts are intelligent or kind?

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I

I think we can just fine. Like I said before, I'm not opposed in the slightest to having separate Mother's day and Father's day (I just don't think Family day is some sort of gay/lesbian apocalypse). I think making allowances as needed will satisfy the concerns of those worried about children feeling left out of Mother's/Father's day, but we won't help anything if we use "life isn't fair" to conclude that children are going to become whiny, weak, entitled, etc. if we try to make any allowances for them.

What's getting some of our goats is that being nice to kids without traditional moms and dads should not translate into canceling or banning Mother's Day. You said you don't mind if it continues. We insist that it does. Likewise with Father's Day. Christmas. Easter. A public school choir should be able to sing "O Come All Ye Faithful" without Americans for the Separation of Church and State fearing an Evangelical apocalypse.

And yes, I want the right to my Big Gulp, Super-sized fries, and a 2nd donut too.

As a sidenote, I never knew that political correctness implied that you had to be nihilist.

Yeah, it does. Because it says that the one person, or the small group--the itsy bitsy oppressed minority get to deny the majority culture their traditions--all because feelings got hurt and they felt left out.

Edited June 19, 2013 by prisonchaplain