“And also trust no one to be your teacher nor your minister, except he be a man of God, walking in his ways and keeping his commandments.” -Mosiah 23:14
| “Public education has served as a check on the power of parents, and this is another powerful reason for maintaining it.” - John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pg. 165
“[schools] should liberate students from the ways of thinking imposed by religions and other traditions of thought.” |
“There is a spirit working among the Saints to educate their own offspring. If our children will be all we will have for a foundation of glory in eternity, how needful that they be properly trained… There are wolves among us in sheep’s clothing ready to lead astray our little ones… Wolves do not devour old sheep when there are any young ones. I have herded sheep long enough to know that. Look after your children.” - Elder John W. Taylor, (Collected Discourses 2:138.)
“There are three dangers that threaten the church from within, and the authorities need to awaken to the fact that the people should be warned unceasingly against them. As I see them, they are flattery of prominent men in the world, false educational ideas, and sexual impurity.” |
| “Most youth still hold the same values of their parents… if we do not alter this pattern, if we don’t resocialize, our system will decay.” – John Goodlad, Schooling for the Future, Issue #9, 1971 |
“Many activities link the values of one generation to the next, but perhaps the most central of these activities is parents teaching children in the home. This is especially true when we consider the teaching of values, moral and ethical standards, and faith.” -Elder L. Tom Perry, April 2010 LDS General Conference |
| “Parents do not own their children. They have no ‘natural right’ to control their education fully.” – John Goodlad / Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pg. 164 |
“[We should] reassert the primary right and responsibility of parents for the total education of their children, including social values, religious convictions, and political concepts. Schools should be reminded that their primary field of competence is academic, not social adjustment, or world citizenship, or sex education. Parents should stand firm on this and not be intimidated by ‘professional educators.’ After all, it’s their children and their money.” -Ezra Taft Benson (An Enemy Hath Done This, p. 231) |
| “Education is a task for both parents and state. The state, parents, and children all have interests that must be protected.” – John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, 2001, pg. 164 |
“While other institutions, such as church and school, can assist parents to ‘train up a child in the way he [or she] should go’ (Proverbs 22:6), ultimately this responsibility rests with parents. According to the great plan of happiness, it is parents who are entrusted with the care and development of our Heavenly Father’s children. ” -Elder L. Tom Perry, April 2010 LDS General Conference |
| “The curriculum of the future will be what one might call the humanistic curriculum.” – John Goodlad / Directions of Curriculum Change, The NEA Journal, March 1966
“Education is thus a most powerful ally of Humanism, and every American public school is a school of Humanism. What can the theistic Sunday-schools, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?” (Humanism is the denial of God and elevation of man. It is the “Korihor” doctrine if you are LDS.) |
“Humanism is a threat to the work of the Lord. One of the greatest threats to the work of the Lord today comes from false educational ideas. There is a growing tendency of teachers within and without the church to make academic interpretations of gospel teachings – to read, as a prophet leader has said, ‘by the lamp of their own conceit.’ Unfortunately, much in the sciences, the arts, politics and the entertainment field, as has been well said by an eminent scholar, ‘all dominated by this humanistic approach which ignores God and his word as revealed through the prophets.’ This kind of worldly system apparently hopes to draw men away from God by making man the ‘measure of all things’ as some worldly philosophers have said.” -Harold B. Lee, Conference Report 10/68 p. 59. “There is promise, given under inspiration from the Almighty, set forth in these beautiful words: “We are very particular to forbid anyone from preaching Catholicism, or Protestantism, or Mormonism, or Judaism, in a public school classroom, but for some reason we are very patient with those who teach the negative expression of religion. |
| “Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now.” – John Goodlad / Schooling for a Global Age, pg. xiii |
“If they embark on this course the difference between the old and the new education will be an important one. Where the old initiated, the new merely ‘conditions’. The old dealt with its pupils as grown birds deal with young birds when they teach them to fly; the new deals with them more as the poultry-keeper deals with young birds- making them thus or thus for purposes of which the birds know nothing. In a word, the old was a kind of propagation-men transmitting manhood to men; the new is merely propaganda.” -C.S. Lewis, Abolition of Man, Pg. 22 |
| “…educators must resist the quest for certainty. If there were certainty there would be no scientific advancement. So it is with morals and patriotism.” – John Goodlad / Education for Everyone: Agenda for Education in a Democracy, Woods Learning Center, pg. 6
“…a student attains ‘higher order thinking’ when he no longer believes in right or wrong. A large part of what we call good teaching is a teacher´s ability to obtain affective objectives by challenging the student’s fixed beliefs. …a large part of what we call teaching is that the teacher should be able to use education to reorganize a child’s thoughts, attitudes, and feelings.” |
“Unfortunately, other educators deny the existence of God or deem God irrelevant to the human condition. Persons who accept this view deny the existence of moral absolutes. They maintain that right and wrong are relative concepts, and morality is merely a matter of personal choice or expediency.” -Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Ensign, October 1992, pg. 60
“God uses scripture to unmask erroneous thinking, false traditions, and sin with its devastating effects. He is a tender parent who would spare us needless suffering and grief and at the same time help us realize our divine potential. The scriptures, for example, discredit an ancient philosophy that has come back into vogue in our day—the philosophy of Korihor that there are no absolute moral standards, that “every man prosper[s] according to his genius, and that every man conquer[s] according to his strength; and whatsoever a man [does is] no crime” and “that when a man [is] dead, that [is] the end thereof” (Alma 30:17–18)” |
| “I walked out of jail and into my first teaching position—and from that day until this I’ve thought of myself as a teacher, but I’ve also understood teaching as a project intimately connected with social justice.” -Bill Ayers at the World Education Forum in Caracas, Venezuela in front of Pres. Hugo Chavez
“It is my expectation that Teacher Education for Democracy and Social Justice will become a rich resource for continuing this multi-layered conversation-from democratic belief to democratic action-that is the hallmark of educational renewal.” |
“In a complete reversal from a century ago, many today would dispute with Alma about the seriousness of immorality. Others would argue that it’s all relative or that God’s love is permissive. If there is a God, they say, He excuses all sins and misdeeds because of His love for us—there is no need for repentance. Or at most, a simple confession will do. They have imagined a Jesus who wants people to work for social justice but who makes no demands upon their personal life and behavior.” -Elder D. Todd Christofferson, April 2010 LDS General Conference
“I wonder how much we offend Satan if the proclamation of our faith is limited only to the great humanitarian work this church does throughout the world, marvelous as these activities are. When we preach the gospel of social justice, no doubt the devil is not troubled.” |
| “…the state we should strive for is better described in Deweyan terms as a social democracy.” – John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, 2001, pg. 153 |
“I feel to warn you that one of the chief means of misleading our youth and destroying the family unit is our educational institutions. There is more than one reason why the Church is advising our youth to attend colleges close to their homes where institutes of religion are available. It gives the parents the opportunity to stay close to their children, and if they become alerted and informed, these parents can help expose the deceptions of men like Sigmund Freud, Charles Darwin, John Dewey, John Keynes and others. There are much worse things today that can happen to a child than not getting a full education. In fact, some of the worst things have happened to our children while attending colleges led by administrators who wink at subversion and amorality.” -Ezra Taft Benson (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 307.) |
| “I do not see how any honest educational reformer in western countries can deny that the greatest practical obstacle in the way of introducing into schools that connection with social life which he regards as desirable is the great part played by personal competition and desire for private profit in our economic life. This fact almost makes it necessary that in important respects school activities should be protected from social contacts and connections, instead of being organized to create them. The Russian educational situation is enough to convert one to the idea that only in a society based upon the cooperative principle can the ideals of educational reformers be adequately carried into operation.” – John Dewey, Impressions of Soviet Russia and the Revolutionary World, pg. 86
“I believe that the school is primarily a social institution. Education being a social process, the school is simply that form of community life in which all those agencies are concentrated that will be most effective in bringing the child to share in the inherited resources of the race, and to use his own powers for social ends. I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living.” |
“When you speak of peace, the Communists mean the cessation of all opposition to Communism, the acceptance of a Communist world. Then, and only then, can there be peace. This alone is what peace means in Communist language. Once this is understood the utter falsity and hypocrisy of Communist references to peace becomes at once obvious. I have mentioned these things simply to emphasize one dominant force which has as its ultimate achievement and victory-the destruction of capitalism, the destruction of the free agency of man which God has given him, and that destruction may be brought about-as advocated by Marx himself-in a brutal way. What is the other force? It is just the opposite. Jesus said to the man who came and asked him which is the greatest law, ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve, and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.’ When Marx was asked one time what was his object, he answered, ‘To dethrone God.’ -David O. McKay, Two Contending Forces, BYU Speech, May 18, 1960 |
| “Every child in America entering school at the age of five is insane because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well – by creating the international child of the future.” -Dr. Chester M. Pierce, Harvard Professor of Education and Psychiatry, in an address to the Childhood International Education Seminar in 1973 |
“From the 5th grade through the 4th year of college, our young people are being indoctrinated with a Marxist philosophy and I am fearful of the harvest. The younger generation is further to the left than most adults realize. The old concepts of our Founding Fathers are scoffed and jeered at by young moderns whose goals appear to be the destruction of integrity and virtue, and the glorification of pleasure, thrills, and self-indulgence.” -Ezra Taft Benson, The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg. 321 |
| “Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished …” -Bertrand Russell, quoting Gottlieb Fichte the head of psychology that influenced Hegel and others. |
“Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him…I caused that he should be cast down;” -Moses 4:3
“Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness;”
“We must protect this American base from the brainwashing, increasingly administered to our youth in many educational institutions across the land, by some misinformed instructors and some wolves in sheep’s clothing. Their false indoctrination, often perpetrated behind the front of so-called academic freedom, is leaving behind many faithless students, socialist-oriented, who are easy subjects for state tyranny.” |
In 1961, the US Supreme Court ruled that Secular Atheistic Humanism was a religion. Within two years prayer was taken out of schools and their demise was soon imminent.
There is a battle going on out there. It is not waged with guns and hand to hand combat. The war is fought inside the chambers of our children’s minds through communicating cognitive dissonance every single day of their lives. These conflicting beliefs are stultifying our future in our children. The satanic forces running amok in this world are battling us for our youth. We must not let them win. This battle is for keeps. It will soon be fought out in the open. The women will oppress and the children will rule (Isaiah 3:12) and chaos will ensue – UNLESS – we repent and change our priorities. There are three to be exact:
1) God First
2) Our Families as God intended it to be ,
3) Our earthly affairs in business third.
There IS no exception. Period.
Wow – great to see direct comparisons – thanks for doing this research!
It is so powerful to see all of these quotes side-by-side. Thanks so much for this comparison. I have shared this link with several friends & family members & hope they, too will learn from it.
I have been so concerned about this exact subject. Thank you for your information this is so important. We need this message sung loud and clear to all parents. This is one reason I home school. I hope more parents will find an alternative to public education. Our children our worth every sacrifice we can make!
Thank you for the great reminder. These children are a wonderful blessing and we have a divine role. We will be held responsible for the things that they are taught. Our complacency or laziness really doesn’t cut it. Secular educators are very determined to completely eliminate moral and spiritual teachings from our schools and this goes against the most fundamental truths of the gospel. This is why I have chosen to home school.
This side by side comparison is the perfect tool to persuade people of the dangers of the humanist/socialist agenda. Although there could have been many, MANY more quotes listed from LDS leaders debunking these false philosophies this still serves as a simple and effective tool to hopefully change the hearts and minds of people here in Alpine School District. I hope this article goes viral. I’d like to see a rebuttal come from our school board or the BYU McKay School of Education who mostly cling so tightly to systems built on incorrect principles.
Cudos for the person who compiled these quotes!
@ Carol, I’d like to add an adjective to those you’ve already listed. “Our complacency or laziness really doesn’t cut it.” Neither does our *busy-ness*! I think that many parents aren’t necessarily lazy, complacent, perhaps. But I’d venture to say that they are too busy rather than too lazy, to do anything about their own children’s educations. It’s so much easier to let the “professionals” take care of that! If more women stayed home to raise their children, their (the children’s) educations would certainly follow.
I don’t live in the Alpine school district and I only heard about this issue through an article in the Salt Lake Tribune. I wish you all success, and I think you’ve done a great job with this site. It’s very sad that the dean of Education at BYU embraces these terrible ideas. Whatever happened to Reading, ‘Riting, and ‘Rithmetic? Now we need to train the children to their “proper roles” in society and “current” form of government.
No wonder so many people homeschool, even in Utah.
None of these quotations from religious leaders has any sway because the LDS Church lacks credibility. In light of overwhelming DNA evidence that American Indians did not originate from the middle east, that the Book of Abraham was a complete hoax, that the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction without a single shred of archeological evidence and that LDS leaders have consistently errored in prophesy–it’s important to view ‘any’ quotations with an appropriate grain of salt. The Mormon faith provides a good system for rearing children and maintaining families but an inadequate means of categorizing and judging current events.
@ Mary. Maybe the LDS church lacks credibility in YOUR eyes, but to a great many in THIS school district, these quotes should not only be extremely credible, but also extremely relevant to the discussion at hand. I am not sure what your beef is with the LDS church or it’s leaders but you either agree or disagree with the quotes and their content. For example, I don’t have to be a catholic to appreciate the quote posted by “guest” from one of the Popes.
As far as your assertions regarding DNA evidence, if you bothered to do a little more research that the anti-mormon produced documentary you watched that gave you your opinion on the matter, you would find that the scientific journals and community, have significantly changed their opinions given new light in the DNA findings arena since the early 2000s when your documentary was produced. If you are truly intellectually honest about the issue and wish to seek truth and not just spread propoganda, I would highly recommend as a starting point that you at least see the documentary by Rod Meldrum called http://www.bookofmormonevidence.org/ that addresses your position using current non-lds scientific research as proof that not ALL American Indians, but rather Haplo Group X, are evidence of the history of the Book of Mormon on the North American continent.
I would also recommend “Evidences of the True Church”
by Dennis K. Brown
@Mary. For more info on the Book of Abraham, see http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/boa.shtml
It is my recollection from a study I did many years ago that the papyri used to translate the Book of Abraham, even though badly damaged by the fires of Chicago in the 1850′s, were donated to the Smithsonian by a private collector. The Smithsonian then recognizing the rightful ownership of the papyri then gave them back to the LDS Church.
The thing is, and I love this about the LDS faith, we are indeed led by fallible men and women who are doing the best the can to serve God and their fellow man, and we should take things with a grain of salt so that we can ultimately rely on God and the Holy Spirit to help us know the truth of all things. We are to seek personal testimony of our leaders and things said rather than just believe on hearsay.
James 1:5 “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.”
Moroni 10:3-5 “Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things (Book of Mormon), if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will fmanifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may aknow the truth of all things.”
If we but follow this counsel and seek to find truth in all things, we will find it.
I find your remarks informative, however as a Catholic why are you only including Mormon prophet remarks under ‘Religious Leaders’?
Candi, thank you for your sincere comment. It was not the author’s intent to intentionally leave out quotes from other faiths. In fact, we welcome them! Since the author and many in the Alpine School District audience are LDS, he was only drawing from his resources. This is certainly not just an LDS issue, but a national political agenda which has crept into this school district without parental knowledge for the most part. Good people of all faiths and backgrounds should be aware of the dangers of humanism and any belief which would threaten our families and our freedoms. We apologize for any misunderstanding and welcome all those of other faiths to add to our list of quotes.
Candi – thanks for the reminder. I have found that a number of Popes have spoken out against socialism, communism, etc. Here’s a quote from Pope Leo XIII on socialism and the family (and then I’ve posted another quotation from an older Pope from the late 1800′s – showing that this concern is not new and shared by many faithful Christians.
“The contention, then, that the civil government should at its option intrude into and exercise intimate control over the family and the household is a great and pernicious error.”
“At the very beginning of Our pontificate, as the nature of Our apostolic office demanded, we hastened to point out in an encyclical letter addressed to you, venerable brethren, the deadly plague that is creeping into the very fibers of human society and leading it on to the verge of destruction; at the same time We pointed out also the most effectual remedies by which society might be restored and might escape from the very serious dangers which threaten it. But the evils which We then deplored have so rapidly increased that We are again compelled to address you, as though we heard the voice of the prophet ringing in Our ears: “Cry, cease not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet.”1 You understand, venerable brethren, that We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day, strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning—the overthrow of all civil society whatsoever.”
Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII promulgated on 28 December 1878.
Great quote!!! Thanks.
Too many people I speak with say that their current board member is “such a nice person.” I don’t care if you’re Santa Claus, the only thing that matters is what you’re teaching my child. Twenty years ago, when I lived in California and my sister lived here, she told me about the Utahn’s apathy, and the trust in other members of the church. We think “They’re LDS, they must be doing what’s right.” Here we see the error of this complacency. All through our history, and BYU’s, there has been the need to purge error, and we as parents must do it.
I am glad to see that the authors here are devoutly religious and respect and revere their religion and its doctrine. However, it is funny how these Mormon radicals (with our Catholic Candi Stone as the exception) really only give one side of “Mormon” beliefs. Did nobody read what Dallin H. Oaks had to say about our democracy? He echoed the words of Cardinal Francis George in saying that the “‘pre-eminent place’ [of the First Amendment] identifies freedom of religion as “a cornerstone of American democracy.’”
Gordon B. Hinckley stated: “In a democracy we can renounce war and proclaim peace. There is opportunity for dissent. Many have been speaking out and doing so emphatically. That is their privilege. That is their right, so long as they do so legally.” By corollary in a republic we are left to the whimsy of our warmongering leaders as to whether our sons and daughters go off to die in some foreign land.
Joseph Smith, the prophet of the restoration even believed in democracy. His “theodemocracy” was based on the two premises that the people should control the day to day life and God set in place the bounds wherein righteous people must remain. To discount democracy entirely is to discount the teaching of the prophet. Brigham Young also taught that the theodemocratic polity would “protect every person, every sect, and all people upon the face of the whole earth, in their legal rights.”
In contrast, Neal A. Maxwell warned against putting all our faith in our political leader elected by our representative democracy when he said, “Significantly, the American presidents whom we admire most are men who have, in one way or another, cracked the Constitution we venerate—whether it was Jefferson in making the unauthorized purchase of the Louisiana Territory, or Jackson defying the United States Supreme Court, or Lincoln suspending certain civil and constitutional rights in order to save the union, or Teddy Roosevelt digging an unfunded Panama Canal while Congress was still debating the merits of the project, or Franklin D. Roosevelt threatening to impose some economic controls whether or not Congress fashioned such a law. It should give us pause that our admiration flows to leaders who were decisive and who assumed great psychological size in American affairs; [when we lay] our liberties at the feet of even great men.”
Another thing that get me quite riled up is the grief people give the McKay School of Education at Brigham Young University. Although I do not agree with the distinction often given to BYU as being the “Lord’s University,” I do think it is important we remember that the Board of Trustee (i.e. the 12 Apostles) are in charge of what takes place at the university. We need look no further than the Poli-Sci prof who spoke out against the churches stance on gay marriage. The next day: he was given the boot. If the McKay School of Education was truly teaching things contrary to those of the church or any of it’s leaders, I know that the brethren would come down hard. Especially considering how public this fiasco has become and how even after all the fallout, the brethren are yet to make any changes to the “dangerous” facets of the curriculum.
Lastly, I think that it is important to point out that our democracy is not broken, why shouldn’t we teach our children the ways of our successful democratic republic. Note the churches statement concerning the recent elections in California on gay marriage:
“Even though the democratic process can be demanding and difficult, Latter-day Saints are profoundly grateful for and respect the ideals of a true democracy. The Church expresses deep appreciation for the hard work and dedication of the many Latter-day Saints and others who supported the coalitions in efforts regarding these amendments.”
With both gay marriage and marijuana, democracy in California has shown us there is still hope for the democracy we live in.
Christopher,
Thank you for writing and presenting another side to this controversy. To note, not only did I see Dallin Oak’s talk on the Constitution, I was there in person giving him a standing ovation. It was a wonderful speech and a great way to celebrate Constitution Day. But there was so much more to his talk than just concentrating on the word ‘democracy’ and you ignored the fact that he started his speech saying that we live in a Republic. I don’t have a problem with the way our leaders use the word democracy because I believe in democratic ideals like most people. But I don’t know if people realize how the word is being used by the Progressive left to accomplish their political goals. We are not against the word democracy. The news and our opposition like to concentrate on that one word to ignore the real argument, and that is Progressive Education from the left is now taking the place of Traditional Classical education which concentrates on academics.
Because of John Goodlad’s constant use of words like ‘morals’, ‘values’, ‘democracy’, ‘critical thinking’ and ‘nurturing’ which are taught at the McKay School of Education and Alpine School District, why would anyone question his educational philosophies? They sound terrific. I doubt most people have done the research we’ve done to discover that MSE and ASD are following an educational mentor who believes in moral relativism, socialism and atheism. We found this after running into many early warning signs that didn’t make sense and were very disturbing. The more we looked, the worse it got.
I don’t see any one of our LDS leaders following the teachings of an atheist, humanist and socialist. I doubt THEY were at the NNER Conferences which featured most of it’s talks on feminism, the gay agenda, forced redistribution of wealth, social justice, or the need to redefine evil in a modern world because the authors of the Bible were male chauvinists. I doubt they were in the audience listening to Bill Ayers speaking about his moral obligation to do what he did in the 60′s. I doubt they know any of this because this political agenda has been very well hidden by using a few phrases by our great leaders mingled with teachings from a worldly philsopher. All of these things, however, LDS leaders have consistently warned the world about.
By the way, are you the same Chris Spencer in Orem who a few years back said these words on a BYU forum?
“Jesus was the ultimate liberal revolutionary of all history. The conservative religious and social structure that he defied hated and crucified him. He rebuked the religious right of his day because they embraced the letter of the law instead of the spirit. Christ Jesus was the original Liberal. He was a progressive and he was judged and hated for it.” (http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/62428)
To say that Christ was the ultimate Progressive Liberal revolutionary who rebuked the religious right and to infer this applies to our day is atrocious. To align Christ with any political party is inexcusable. This my friend, is why parents would like their children to concentrate on academics in public school and leave personal opinion about politics and religion out of the classroom, especially when government-run public schools follow humanist, atheist and socialist educational leaders who directly oppose parental beliefs. What is worse in my mind is having a teacher believe in something as disturbing as what you said here and then teach it at a University and school named after two of our great prophets who warned us repeatedly of these worldly philosophies in our educational institutions.
One side of Mormon beliefs on this article? Are you suggesting that there isn’t universal agreement in the LDS faith on the dangers of humanism and the virtues of the law of agency? Very little in this post deals with anything on the subject of democracy. What is shown above is indicative of the problem these prominent educators display when using this term, that it isn’t “democracy” as a process, but Democracy as a form of government. Jefferson both referred to preserving our democracy, as well as decrying Democracy, the difference being this very thing. When you view how people use the term, we have to make that distinction. I’m pretty sure Elder Oaks and the rest of the brethren would concur that the form of the American government is a republic. It’s not just President Benson and President McKay that mentioned that periodically. For more information, please read this article on the site which helps illustrate what Goodlad means when he uses the term. It’s not just the process to he and Bill Ayers, it’s the form, and that’s dangerous.
http://www.saveasd.com/asd-democracy-explained/
@ Susie:
First I would like to make something clear: a republic IS a democracy. According to the “father of the constitution” (James Madison) a republic is defined as a representative or indirect democracy (see Federalist Paper #10). The type of democracy that you and Norton appear to be opposed to is a social democracy. The main difference between these two gov’t models is that a social democracy seeks to reform capitalism to align it with the ethical ideals of social justice while maintaining the capitalist mode of production whereas an indirect democracy as it is defined by James Madison does not directly address the market system used in the gov’t. One can assume that an indirect democracy indirectly addresses the market system in that the federal gov’t has a limited impact on its regulations. Furthermore, a social democracy does not directly address the interplay of the federal and local gov’t. These interpretations of the ideals in governmental models are not always an accurate representation. It has also been said that social democracy leads towards a socialist governmental system. However, this is antithetical to that which a social democracy stands for. A social democracy is just that, a democracy. Socialism, does not allow for any public input as to how the gov’t is run. Before making broad generalizations about political systems, make sure that you understand those systems and how they are employed in the public realm.
You also said that because John Goodlad does not believe the teachings of our church, we should ignore the good things he teaches. To draw from a story of Spencer W. Kimball, I would like to illustrate this point. As President Kimball walked across the BYU campus, one of his hosts noticed some students who were inappropriately dressed (or at least in the opinion of this particular person). The host accordingly said to President Kimball, in a disapproving tone, “Will you just look at those girls?” assuming, that President Kimball would justify his taking offense and endorse his implicit criticism. Instead, President Kimball responded, “Yes, aren’t they beautiful?” The point I hope to make here is, yes oftimes, people not of our faith (oftimes people who are) teach things that are not in accordance with the teachings of the gospel, however we are good Latter-day Saints should, as President Hinckley said, “you bring all the good that you have, and let us see if we can add to it.” Let us look at the good that people do and say and place the wrong or inappropriate things in its proper place.
Lastly, I am quite astonished that you would go to such lengths to find an editorial I wrote to the Daily Universe over four years ago to use as ammunition to support your opinions. You must really have a bone to pick with me to go through probably dozens of google searches (at least that is what it took my wife to find that particular letter) just to have one more argument lay on the table. In reagards to that letter written almost FIVE years ago, let me clarify a few things: context, context, context. To ignore the context that the editorial was written would be a gross mis-statement of intent (almost to the point of being dishonest). It would be helpful to read the editorals written two days previous to the one I had written. For brevity sake, I will not go into that here. Your claim that I identified Christ as a liberal according to todays standards is incorrect. Rather that Christ, as a liberal in his own times was hated for going against the norm. I would compare this mentality more to that of Thomas Jefferson when he said that we needed a rebellion ‘at least once every 20 years’ in order to overturn a corrupt status quo. Also, to say that I, in my editorial, pigeon-holed Christ into some modern-day political party is again an inappropriate representation of my words.
From this point, you make a quantum leap from my opinions of the doctrine preached by Christ to the reason for separation of church and state. I didn’t quite follow your train of thought, but will address it anyways. I echo what I had said to Norton in an earlier post (perhaps on a different page), but I think it is important to note that your views concerning how the children in our school district are being educated do not represent the majority of the parents in the district and therefore are not “directly oppose[d to] parental beliefs”. I also, think that if you are so disturbed at the things BYU is teaching its students, maybe a fresh perspective would do you good. When was the last time you attended a class at the McKay School of Education? By any chance did you attend the entire symposium dedicated to teaching children according to the values we hold which was led by Elder Holland? I doubt it. I teach at Brigham Young University as a graduate student, and to let you know the Board of Trustees is very involved with the teachings of not only our professors, but also a lowly graduate student like myself. Every semester, I am required to give a copy of my syllabi to the department who in turn gives it to the Vice President of Curriculum (who also happens to be a good friend of mine). After which, these are reviewed and accessed to assure that nothing disagreeable is being taught. Although BYU, claims to allow complete academic freedom, in the time that I have been at BYU, I know of four professors who were sacked for teaching things that were contrary to the positions of the church. When a faculty member is hired, they are given a booklet entitled “Expectation of a Faculty Appointment”. This booklet states: “it is the responsibility of faculty to sustain the university in its purpose and unceasingly contribute to its intellectual and spiritual growth.” In my opinion, a belief that the faculty and/or the university does not live up to their responsibility and is allowed to do so under the direction of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, placed that person on mighty thin ice.
Lastly, I think it is interesting that the views expressed on this website claim to be wrapped in the arms of the gospel and the church of Christ (for example, espousing the idea that the constitution is scripture, the founding fathers were prophets, and that Utah stands apart as the holy among unholies). These views are (as far as the commentators and moderators have made clear) entirely based upon quotations of opinions of various brethren in the church. To base one’s own opinions upon the teachings of these brethren is simply a matter of bias. There is no compulsion for the rest of the Latter-day Saint community nor the people who do not share our faith to align themselves with these teachings. To quote from Bruce R. McConkie in a letter written to a man addressing this very premise, “Wise gospel students do not build their philosophies of life on quotations of individuals, even though those quotations come from presidents of the Church. Wise people anchor their doctrine on the Standard Works.” If you are going to use the “beliefs of the parents” (i.e. the doctrine of the LDS Church) as the base from which your beliefs are derived let’s have a bit more doctrine, and not just the musings of the former Secretary of Agriculture, who for all intents and purposes had not governmentally appointed reason to address the woes and vices of political structures not of our own. All the brethren have their own opinions, none of them agree (as far as we can tell) on everything, especially government. Forget not, the former member of the First Presidency, James E. Faust, and the current general authority, Marlin K. Jensen (both democrats) who, according to your standards could be referred to as “wild-eyed liberals”.
I do not agree with everything I was taught in school (nor in church for that matter). Teachers do their best to teach their students what, according to their own opinions are just and true principles. Parents are to augment (or replace) the teachings of their teachers with those that are more in line with the opinions of the parents. However, what you are calling for is the compulsion of teachers (regardless of their faith or beliefs) to only teach those things endorsed by you or Norton Oak or Scott Bell or any number of the myriad of people caught up in this mud-slinging debate. In my opinion, the lesser the compulsion the better; not only in education, government, or religion, but in how we choose to conduct our everyday lives. Compulsion to only teach those things approved by a small number of displeased parents sounds like nothing more that the plan of the Great Deceiver, who with great pleasure led away a third of our siblings to never-ending stagnation. Let’s not follow in his footsteps, let’s not force the school board, or the administration, or the legislation to teach only those things of which we approve to be taught in the classrooms. Let’s take our own footsteps in teaching our children the things we feel are important in our homes. Doesn’t that sound like a great FHE activity to you?
Chris,
I understand the difference between Democracy and Republic. Although I’m not a Constitutional scholar, I hang out with many of them and they give me their full support. You are right, we have a problem with social and political democracy. As much as mission statements keep changing to hide that message, the core direction is not changing and that is our main beef. That was just an early warning sign. I appreciate the time and explanation you put into your response. I would like to address a few things in your post.
1. You say, “a social democracy seeks to reform capitalism to align it with the ethical ideals of social justice”. I have a problem with the forced ‘social justice’ which you describe as ethical. Specifically, Elder D. Todd Christofferson spoke against this in one of the last conferences. I have a problem with Progressive social justice which leads to demonizing our great country and forces the redistribution of wealth through big taxes and big government.
2. You say, “…people not of our faith (oftimes people who are) teach things that are not in accordance with the teachings of the gospel, however we are good Latter-day Saints should, as President Hinckley said, “you bring all the good that you have, and let us see if we can add to it.”
I agree completely. But comparing beautiful little girls to an educational reformer who pushes humanism, socialism and atheism to BYU students? Really? Goodlad’s whole educational approach is to ultimately teach humanism and to produce children who have the attitudes and dispositions to live in a social democracy and to rid the world of the greed of capitalism. How do you add good to that? And why is that the main purpose of education at these institutions of learning in this free Republic?
3. You underestimate my research skills. From your email I guessed that you taught at BYU but didn’t want to make the assumption so I just Googled your name with BYU. That post popped up 3rd on my very first search and went right to your comment. It took me less than 2 min to know who you were and read that comment. Perhaps I can offer your wife a few pointers. I read the whole post and referenced it for anyone who wanted to see the whole thing in context. I did not take anything out of context.
4. You also underestimate my scripture reading skills and assume that I only read one or two quotes from old prophets. On the contrary, most of the parents involved in this research and those concerned with the direction of ASD who work with us are top scholars of the scriptures and many other great books. We just have a different political perspective than you. I have no problem with agreeing and abiding with all of our prophets’ and apostles’ words no matter what their political leanings. I don’t ask. It’s not important. And I come from a family with very diverse religious teachings so I am knowledgeable about many religions. I’m also a convert and have respect for people and ideas of all faiths. I believe the teachings we bring up on this site are pretty universal for most religions. We welcome input from people of all faiths and don’t mean to isolate anyone.
5. You said, “Parents are to augment (or replace) the teachings of their teachers with those that are more in line with the opinions of the parents.”
How do we know what those teachings are that we’re supposed to ‘replace’ if school books and homework are not allowed home and kids are away from us for 6 hours a day? I agree with this sentence to a point, but then when parents find out and write about these opposing teachings and address them on this website, we’re attacked because we don’t fall in line 100% with the district beliefs. That doesn’t show much tolerance or critical thinking, or respect for parents. All we’re trying to do is shine the light on Goodlad and his teachings. Some of these teachings make their way into the classroom and parents now have a forum for sharing so they can bring up these things around the dinner table for discussion. Why not use your own advice and welcome opposing thoughts and beliefs instead of knocking them down because they come from people who don’t agree with you?
6. We’re not calling for “the compulsion of teachers (regardless of their faith or beliefs) to only teach those things endorsed by you or Norton Oak or Scott Bell or any number of the myriad of people caught up in this mud-slinging debate.”
First, his name is Oak Norton. Second, please don’t put so many words in my mouth which are not true. I see more uncivility, mistruths and misunderstandings out of the mouths of those who oppose us than discussing the real issues we have brought up. Third, we’re not mud-slinging. We brought up quotes and facts and as yet, no one has once refuted them. We are concerned with the level of Progressive politics being pushed at the district level and incorporated into teacher training instead of traditional academics. We are concerned that the teachings of an openly humanist, atheist and socialist are getting more attention and praise than the words and teachings of the great men the institutions are named after. We bring up facts, quotes and references, yet are being attacked with name calling and people saying we’re lying or misrepresenting them. I wish people would address the issues at hand. We can agree to disagree about politics, but we need to somehow come to an understanding about the purpose of education besides changing our way of government into a social democracy and enculturating the children at school to accomplish that end. Why isn’t the purpose of education about academics anymore? Why can’t we teach common principles which everyone will be happy with? We want teachers to teach what they are good in, and for the district to stop forcing them to push Goodlad’s Democracy training in every class. We trust these teachers to teach the subjects they are good at. Their main job of teaching core subjects should not be usurped by a man or a movement that wants to change our way of government.
Why would the ASD and MSE professors be upset with us saying that we would rather teachers teach the subjects they are trained in without the social engineering and political philosophies being imposed on them by a district? To most people, this is common sense. Since when did teaching academics become right wing radical? Goodlad teaches humanism, moral relativism, social justice and changing children’s dispositions and behaviors into those of a social and political democracy. He encourages feminism, the gay agenda, the redistribution of wealth, and he puts academics last on his list of priorities, if it’s even on there at all. Why would you have a hard time wondering why parents would reject this? We also read in his books that parents WILL reject it if they are not equally indoctrinated so that they and the community believe in this new political purpose for schooling also. No thank you. And doing all this while using the words ‘morals, values, and critical thinking’ is very deceiving and the leaders of this movement know it. THAT’s why we speak up. Progressive teachers have had years to voice their opinions directly to our children without parents knowing what they were doing. Please afford us the opportunity to disagree civilly and present ideas which we believe in for the good of OUR children. Because they are OUR children, not the teachers’ nor the districts’. And the money you and other teachers and administrators are paid with comes from the parents through tuition, taxes and tithing. To us, posting on a forum like this IS practicing democracy, critical thinking and civil discourse.
Somehow parents, teachers, administrators and the school board need to come together with a common purpose for public schooling instead of letting an outsider who is a nationally acclaimed socialist, humanist and atheist decide that for us. You might be surprised at the great things we can do when we come together in an honest, civil manner. The reasons parents feel they need this forum is that we have felt a ‘district vs. parents’ conflict for years because elitist educators think parents need to be placated instead of respected and truly listened to in real problem solving discourse. In this kind of ongoing conflict, the children ultimately lose.
This whole discussion seems odd to me, especially because you seem so adamantly opposed to the teachings of John Goodlad based solely upon his stance on morality and politics. Yet, in the various musings of Oak Norton, there appears to be a great deal of support for the writing and teachings (if you will) of Ayn Rand. I assume then that he is in support of her ideology, much of which goes as follows:
“Faith, as such, is extremely detrimental to human life”
“faith, is only a short-circuit destroying the mind”
“Faith is the worst curse of mankind, as the exact antithesis and enemy of thought”
“These two — reason and freedom — are corollaries, and their relationship is reciprocal: when men are rational, freedom wins; when men are free, reason wins. Their antagonists are: faith and force. These, also, are corollaries: every period of history dominated by mysticism, was a period of statism, of dictatorship, of tyranny.”
“mysticism [or faith] will always lead to the rule of brutality”
Yes, John Goodlad is an atheist, humanist, socialist, etc. and yes, Ayn Rand is an atheist, capitalist, and an ethical egotist. Neither of these individuals stand for the typical “Mormon” values you seek so desperately to promote. However, these “negative” traits do not negate the good things that both of these people stood for. Nobody gets everything right, everybody has their rough edges. My question is, why do you seem to promote the writings of Ayn Rand while ignoring her radical, anti-Christ, anti-faith lifestyle and beliefs and yet you lift the negative traits of John Goodlad into the spotlight while ignoring the sound, positive philosophies he seeks to use to better the education of the masses. Philosophies such as:
The role of teachers is “to provide for every child the richest kind of environment where the youngster can develop as a responsible human being”
“We must encourage people to recognize freedom as an inherent part of what it means to be human”
“It is our moral obligation to maintain and enhance human dignity results in the human rights to equal freedom, equal consideration, and brotherly/sisterly love”
John Goodlad “believes there to be moral dispositions that should be acceptable to all people in a democratic society: fairness, equality, justice, freedom, caring, community, and relatedness”
“There has not been, for me, any place outside the family, either as child or parent, that has offeren equivalent degrees of freedom and unconditional love”
It look like what we have here is a bit of a double standard!
Hi Chris,
Thanks for writing. If you read the post you referenced in another comment closer (http://blog.oaknorton.com/2009/05/atlas-shrugged/) you’ll find that I’m not endorsing Rand, nor have I written elsewhere about her in any other way. I linked to a fascinating graph and posted a video sharing quotes from her book related to the graph on Mark Perry’s website.
I’m sure you read a variety of things from different perspectives. I’ve never read Rand’s works and so I would like to read Atlas Shrugged or perhaps some of her essays on capitalism because it seems she had a clear grasp on natural rights. She was fiercely anti-socialist (polar opposite to Goodlad) which of course matches my belief system.
I’ve read from Goodlad’s books and found them to be quite disturbing. Just the first dozen pages of his Developing Democratic Character in Youth is quite alarming as he talks about the need for population control. Surely you’ve read enough of Goodlad to understand that when he talks about justice and fairness he’s talking about social justice via socialism. It’s why Bill Ayers the Marxist terrorist was invited by Goodlad to be the keynote speaker at last month’s NNER conference.
As for a double standard, I’ve just looked to verify things and it appears this is my only post specifically about Rand aside from one other post on my UtahsRepublic.org site where I quote someone else who mentions Rand in his quote. That sort of makes your comment look like you’re grasping at straws here. I’m not trying to promote Rand being taught in the school district classrooms or having her philosophy made into teacher training sessions for the district which is what has happened with Goodlad. This is hardly a double standard.
I also find it interesting that you have a BYU email address and yet you say I’m “desperately” trying to promote Mormon values. Don’t you believe in your values enough to promote them? Goodlad is actively pushing the gay agenda (http://www.nnerpartnerships.org/pdf/GLBTQQIIAA.pdf) and he’s tried to push it through his NNER organization into BYU (http://www.utahsrepublic.org/education/daily-herald-what-social-democracy-means-to-utah-county-educators/). I would have to think you’d find that very alarming and I wonder why you wouldn’t rise up and call attention to this if you are LDS.
Oak
you sound like a bunch of people that are getting ready to start your own religion, and live in a compond somewhere. You home school your kids, meanwhile they are becoming socially crippled due to your PROTECTION. Just because you had a bad experience along the way somewhere, don’t take it out on your kids.
I am a 7th grade home schooled student. I chose to be home schooled! It was my choice, not my parents forcing me out of school. I have been to public schools, charter schools, and I have been home schooled. I am in no way “socially crippled”. I asked my parents to take me out of public school because I was not learning anything in my school in the Alpine School District. I spoke to my teachers and my principal numerous times but both denied me a chance to excel. Now I am learning Algebra, real American history, world history, English, Latin, and famous works of literature. Some of the smartest and kindest people I have ever known are or have been home schooled.
Home Schooled Student -
Thank you for your perspective! It is refreshing to see a student who recognizes the lack of quality curriculum, and who acts on their desire to learn! I believe my 10th grader is coming to the same conclusion. He is an MVHS student who has almost no homework, is bored in classes, and finds the atmosphere less than stimulating academically (but it’s certainly FUN!). I believe he was quite shocked when I told him I attended 7 classes per day in high school. We had homework every night, and I can promise you that we scored better in mathematics and science than even some of our college age students do now. I believe he realizes his 4 classes per day, although lengthy, are lacking in depth and content.
And good for you for standing up for your choices and following through with your desires. You are obviously well spoken, can write a convincing statement, and are obviously NOT “socially crippled”. I believe “Seavy” suffers from a societal bias against homeschoolers that is unfair and quite frankly without merit. Some of our greatest politicians, academics, and scientists were “homeschooled” or self-schooled. Congratulations on taking charge of your education! Best of luck to you in your studies!
Help me understand: Secular schools are supposed to teach our children secular subjects, i.e, math, languages, art, music, etc.
To my mind, this leaves the teaching of religion entirely to the parents and their church of choice. How can anyone possibly think that’s a bad thing?
Exactly! Let the schools teach secular subjects and leave the false religions of Humanism and Social Justice out. The reason for this post is to remind religious parents that we have been warned repeatedly of these FALSE doctrines which are so prevalent in the public school system and to safeguard our families against them.