In other words, Obama is wasting his time here. I say, let him.

If I were a teacher I would treat Obama’s intrusion as demeaning my profession.

Gentlemen/Ladies:

I am the father of an 8th grader at Farquhar Middle School, and I wish to express my concern about the MCPS system participating in President Obama’s speech to schools on Tuesday, September 8.

The speech itself is certain to be harmless. I don’t expect my daughter to come home and berate me or her mother for being against this program or that agenda. I do expect that this speech will be just another Daddy Speech, meant to encourage my daughter to work hard in school.

But you know what? The President of the United States — whether an Obama a Bush or a Lincoln — is not my daughter’s daddy. That’s my job.

The other thing I object to is a big portion (an entire portion?) of a school day being devoted to the President and His Works and Admonishments, for no reason other than he seems to think it should be. There’s no national emergency, this isn’t an inauguration or a joint address to Congress. It’s the President deciding, for reasons entirely his own, to take over the public school system for twenty minutes or an hour or a day.

And I object to that.

I urge you to not participate in this exercise which is being orchestrated for political purposes and which serves no educational purpose. My daughter’s teachers and her parents are responsible for her education.

Thank you for your consideraton.
John Pike
Olney, Maryland

How very North Korea of this White House — The Dear Leader Leads the Happy Children in Song. shudder

You’re right Stephen, you are your son’s father, Obama is not, but if you’re afraid of the influence of those who don’t agree with you you’re in for a rocky road while he’s in school.

Try being a little more confident in your abilities as a parent. Oh, and take off the skirt, it clashes with the whole “suave” vibe.

Barack Obama is father to the country. Do you not understand? He is The Obama.

Pledge to him:

Agent Bedhead:
You’re forgetting the opportunity cost. If 10% get out of the public schools and manage to become Libertarians or Republicans. you must also consider the poisoned thinking of the rest. I’m all for the “what doesn’t kill me only makes me stronger” theory of personal growth, but ought that be the default shoved on to kids?

Then again, I’m sure the Sidwell Friends school will have it on new 42″ LCD TVs in each classroom.

‘Nuff said…

I think I understand your concern, but I believe you are conflating morality and ethics.

Ethics is you saying to my daughter, “We do not hit each other in this class. If you do this, you will be corrected (isolated, written up, grade lowered, etc.).”

Morality is you saying to my daughter, “It’s never okay to use violence. Good people don’t hit other people.”

If you can’t see the difference between the two, then I may not want you to teach my kid.

Helping, hugging, hand-holding, other expressions of compassion–these are actions, and thus belong in the ethical sphere. The great majority of the time, they are welcome and positive. But they may be informed by a wide range of moralities.

I may choose to act compassionately because I feel a duty to do so, and may not feel much affection for the children I so act toward. The risk being that I may be stiff or cold and not connect as well with the child. Or, I may act compassionately because I empathize with and feel real affection for the child. The risk being that I might reside somewhere on the continuum of affection rather too close to, say, a Michael Jackson.

As a parent, morality is my job, and part of that job is to support those ethical rules and behaviors that a teacher promotes in his or her classroom, TO THE EXTENT that my morality agrees with those ethics.

For instance, I would support the rule of no hitting, UNTIL my daughter is hit–at which point I would allow her to use force appropriate to discourage further attention of that kind. Because my family’s morality is not that “violence is always wrong,” but that “violence is only to be used defensively, and then only if other options will not work.” When and if the classroom rule conflicts with my family’s moral code, I expect my daughter to act according to our moral code, and she can expect me to protect and support her by stepping in to explain, negotiate, and if necessary remove her from that conflicting environment if it is serious enough.

Bringing this back around to the President, I’ve read the agenda for this speech and believe that, while there is much to recommend it, there is also a curious “cult of personality” and reversal of authority implied in the speech which I believe conflicts with my moral code. The President works for us, not the other way around. Many of the particular things this particular President has done or plans to do while in office are also troubling to me. I see no reason to use any of my daughter’s valuable learning time in listening to an advertisement for the President.

I am not, nor I believe are many people, calling for this speech to be banned or disallowed. I am merely planning to keep my child from exposure to what I believe is an attempt at indoctrination of an authoritarian kind, in a context that engenders groupthink, to an audience that is exceptionally susceptible to suggestion.

Any slippery slope in this event is being greased by the President, not me.

Hmm… School wasn’t ever that kinky when I went there.

Oh wait… You were a GIRL.

Never mind.