The three Democrats running for president say yes.

Personally, I have no problem with such a book if that's what parents want to read to their kids, or have them read.

But... Should government school teachers be making decisions about controversially charged material being presented to children this age? Do second graders need this kind of thing dropped in their lap at that age? Shouldn't parents and not the government school officials make that decision?

There's about a bazillion kids books out there without any controversial subject matter they can use to teach reading with. I can only think of one reason a teacher would select this book.

Okay, who gets to be the first one to call me homophobic?

To your command, sire.

Maybe if children are taught about homosexuality this early not so many will think of it as a mental illness and start respecting them as totally normal people.

The children won't become gay if they're not already are, so I don't see any problem with this especially in public schools.

If it would be a private christian school or somthing like that it would be a different story.

Public schools aren't there so parents can decide what their children should learn. There you have to teach stuff from everything to almost everything not only conservative family values.

Wow, you actually came right out and said government shools have more authority than parents. I wonder if you'd change your tune if said government school had decided kids need to know about Noah and the Ark.

I believe that parents have a right to control what their children learn, absolutely. Whether or not you agree with what they teach their children is none of your business.

I won't be sending my kids to public school. Our public schools only serve to shape people into good little drones for the state, which is what the public schools are designed to do.

Conform. Consume. Obey.

The Underground History of American Education - John Taylor Gatto

Of course they need to know about noah and the arch, just like they should know about Buddha, the Nazis, Evolution, Creation, french fries, pearl harbor.

That's fair education. to get to learn about everything, to have the knowledge to form your own opinion.

So you want your children to be your little drones. They're not your property, they just happen to have the same genes.

they have the right to be educated.

In second grade? I don't want government school teaching my kids about religion - I can handle that fine thanks. Just teach them how to read so when I give them something to read they can.

Children are the property of the parents, for all intents and purposes. Historically, they've always been treated as such. It's only since the advent of state-controlled education where parents are treated as the enemy of their children.

They don't "just happen" to have my genes. I give them my genes when my wife and I create a child.

There's still a difference teaching them that there are religions (what they are about) and to teach them religion as something they have to believe. I don't know about the US but here minors are allowed to chose wheter they want to have a religion or not and what they believe.

To the books with homosexuals context. Do you think the children become gay because they learn thee is nothing wrong about homosexuals that early?
If you're gay. you're born gay, you can't become gay nor straight just because you want to.

This will only help them to learn to respect other people. People fear stuff they don't know about.

Historical women had no rights and slavery was fine. So, It's not an argument.

Childrean have their own mind and they have the right to develop their own feelings and opinion. If you want a personal obedient slave, go build a robot, but don't hinder other humans to develop themselves.

It's not about the content of the book, it's about parental control. They are disregarding the wishes of the parents.

Regardless of how you feel about homosexuality, whether or not it's an appropriate topic for the second grade is certainly worthy of debate.

And comparing raising children to slavery is a weak attempt to distract from the fact that you have no regard for the parents wishes. You apparently believe that the government should raise peoples children. Hitler and Stalin would agree with you, if you want to start taking history out of context to make points.

Why? What is so special about homosexuality? Do you think they're going on a rampage as adults because they heard about homosexuality early in their life?
What other than understanding and respect for others and even themselves will it teach them? They're not going to show them porn.

people being property of others the definition of slavery!

Again, the issue isn't the homosexuality. It's about a parent's right to choose when their children learn about anything, period. As a responsible parent, I'm not going to abdicate that decision to the state. If it were a book on Christopher Columbus, and I objected to it, I have the right to make that decision. You're missing the point in your blind state-worship.

Hitler and Stalin.

If you don't want them to learn what a public school teaches send them on a private school or teach them at home. public schools' purpose is to teach them everything, not just the stuff you want.

You said childrean are your property, this is slavery. They have their own will, which you apparently don't want them allow to have.

If I am responsible for the actions of my children, which I would be, then with that responsibility come the necessity of control.

I guess since the government makes rules for us and expects them to be followed, we must be it's property, too.

You should read how a democracy or republic works, we chose which laws are made with our votes.

You want a dictatorship of your minority. You don't care about the rights of the others.

No, I want the freedom to make my own choices, the freedom from arbitrary decisions about my children's education.

I understand systems of government. I also understand human nature. Governments have a long, long history of not representing the wishes of their people, regardless of what system the government opperates under. Hitler was elected.

I disagree with that out of hand.

On the one hand, I would like to have sole responsibility for my child. But there are too many parents who have no business making decisions about what their children learn. So I think there should be some sort of minimal guidelines for what a child learns---and I do mean minimal. I can almost guarantee that LordFu would more than meet the guidelines that I have in mind, so I would support his right to see to his children's teaching.

As to the gay story issue: I don't think it's appropriate. I do not think it is the business of the school system to teach social issues. They should be teaching language, math, science, history. Anything else just distracts from the business at hand.

Exactly what I was thinking and about to say. It is inevitable in a public school system that there will be differences in opinion amongst parents about what should be in the curriculum and what shouldnt be. Just as you feel this shouldn't be, there will be others that think it should be a requirement. Or do you think that only people who agree with your choices should be able to control their kids' education content in public schools?

You have the right to voice your opinion to the school about curriculum, but it is them (or the education department of the Government) which will (and should) ultimately decide.

If you don't like the decisions, homeschool or send the kids to one of your precious private schools.