Monday, August 4, 2008

Follow-up to 'Another anti-religion beat-up'

I note with gratitude that my comment at Ms. Parker's blog was indeed published, and elicited the following clarification from her:

"Yes the program is taught by the designer of the course, Bruce Coleman.Public school parents did not know they were sending their children to a class that was"upfront Christian.” It appears nor did some teachers in the public schools where it was taught."

I posted one last comment:

"
“Yes the program is taught by the designer of the course, Bruce Coleman”

Thankyou for clarifying that. Why, though, did you fail to mention it either in your original article or your blog post? I understand the difficulties of the news cycle but it was a fairly crucial piece of information to miss.

“Public school parents did not know they were sending their children to a class that was"upfront Christian."”

This is the fault neither of the parents nor of the programme’s presenters. Nor, for that matter, of the Department. What did the school Heads of Curriculum, or whoever examines teaching content, have to say for themselves?

Reginaldvs Cantvar "

Now, I should point out that I do not approve of 'sex education' in the classroom, since an education in chastity is a duty of parents that they must discharge directly rather than by delegating it to schoolteachers. There is also, in co-educational classes, the additional risk of serious embarassment, even humiliation. But clearly there is a place for learning about the pre-birth development of babies in the context of high school biology classes.

Furthermore, true 'personal development' comes from conforming oneself ever more closely to the example and teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ, not by idle talk of 'self-image' and 'self-esteem'.

Reginaldvs Cantvar

2 comments:

Louise said...

All so true, Pole. Glad your comment was published.

valentines day said...

Nice post and thanks for sharing my dear friend
Happy Valentines Day.