Stones Cry Out

And homeschoolers can also use this fantastic web site called Conservapedia! So much better than Wikipedia ... Not.

Once again, there's the WND fiction and then there's the reality.

1. It's not an ongoing class dealing with homosexuality, it's an orientation class that deals with many things - "The topic of homosexuality is only one of many subjects covered in the orientation; others include study habits, and becoming getting familiar with the school and its resources."
2. While required, "The class is mandatory, but parents can choose to remove their child on days the lessons concern them, school officials said. Some parents are pulling their children out of the program, The Chicago Tribune reported."
3. The FoxNews and other accounts (foxnews cited above) mention nothing of a confidentiality agreement that must be signed.

What actually happens is some gay students bravely get up and answer some questions and discuss their lives, in an effort to help stop the bullying of homosexuals.

In the real world, if we have students who are being beat up and taunted because of their sexual orientation, school officials have a responsibility to do something about it. This is one school's approach.

They're normalizing the notion that, like it or not, gay folk are here and do not deserve to be beaten or killed.

Radical stuff, that.

Dan Trabue

Could you provide some links? I looked for "Deerfield High School" in Google News and didn't see any of the articles you mention.

Click here for statements from parents that indeed a non-disclosure contract was pressured onto students. Yeah, yeah, it's a Focus on the Family site, but that shouldn't change the fact that parents are speaking out about it.

Please show your straw man the door. I did not say anything against the "radical" idea of sensitivity training per se, only that the secrecy was out of place in a public school.

And I like your bit about "once again" a WND fiction, when that last "fiction" you complained about was also later reported by the Associated Press. But no mention about "AP fiction". Any news organization should be called on the carpet for inaccuracies, but it sounds like you're holding WND to its own, unique standard.

I have yet to see an AP story about the ridiculous sotry about 1 in 10 students being sexually assaulted by teachers. You have a link?

See the comment on this post for my post on the article, and my "closed circuit" comment to you regarding the AP's use of the same source as WND.

(I e-mailed you when I posted the comment, but it may not have made it to you.)

Perhaps I'm missing something. I still see no link to an AP story quoting this person. I see one link to what looked like an editorial (not from AP, as far as I could tell - Buffalo News?), but it was a broken link.

Yeah, looks like it's not there anymore. I found another copy of the article here. However, the quotes from the article I included speak to my point quite directly.

I wasn't suggesting that any teacher abuses of power and/or assaults are a good thing nor that they don't happen. I object to using a source that reports ridiculous accusations without some resource.

The AP story told of the horrible problem of teacher sexual assault/abuse and it IS horrible.

But the WND story reported a ridiculous number which only serves to undermine their credibility and, as a result, the credibility of the story. Do you see the problem with that sort of "reporting"? You end up undermining legitimately bad news if and when you ever actually report real news facts.

WND is not a "news" organization, they are an opinion organization. Which is fine, but they shouldn't be presented as a reliable news source.

That has been disproven too often, already.

I wasn't suggesting that any teacher abuses of power and/or assaults are a good thing nor that they don't happen.

I never said you did.

I object to using a source that reports ridiculous accusations without some resource.

WND reported a number; "An estimated 5 million students" based on claims of the head of a group who deals with educator sexual abuse. On their web site, they quote Prof. Shakeshaft's 15% statement.

The AP reported a number, and from Prof. Shakeshaft directly. This time the number is 10%.

Same source, and, based on your comments from the first time we dealt with this, you believe neither of them. However, you lambaste one news organization and have yet to give equal treatment to the other.

The AP story told of the horrible problem of teacher sexual assault/abuse and it IS horrible.

Never said it wasn't.

But the WND story reported a ridiculous number which only serves to undermine their credibility and, as a result, the credibility of the story. Do you see the problem with that sort of "reporting"? You end up undermining legitimately bad news if and when you ever actually report real news facts.

Fair enough. I ask you again; since the AP reported a number you disagreed with from, ultimately, the exact same source as WND, will you hold the two to the same standard?

WND is not a "news" organization, they are an opinion organization. Which is fine, but they shouldn't be presented as a reliable news source.

Guess the AP shouldn't be as well? If not, the reporting of these numbers proves nothing one way or the other about either organization. It does display your disdain for WND, to which you're more than entitled, but I have a feeling you're overly exuberant about heaping criticism on them when it's not warranted, and seeing opinion in a news story when it's not there.

I'm hitting the road tomorrow for a week so if you have a reply, I'd like to respond, but it'll be after Easter.

The AP reported her 10% related to "educator sexual misconduct," not 15% and assault. Nonetheless, that is a hugely large number to quote without some follow up (and I didn't see that in my first readthrough - sorry).

So, yes, in that story, I think the AP was negligent. But they didn't make that the focus of the story, it was sort of slid in there.

If I noted repeated instances of that sort of reporting (and if they made that the story and used only the one source, as WND did), then I'd have problems with AP.