Should schools start teaching courses on ethics ?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

If so should those teachings be based upon biblical principles (Proverbs etc.)?? Not suggesting teaching religion just the ethical principles . Sure liberals/dems/leftists will cry holy murder about it but isn't that what our kids are missing and possibly why there is so much corruption, crime and filthy behavior in our society? And why not start teaching civics classes again? I see no good objections to either myself.. And as a great benefit both would counter the dire muslim menace we face! Tyr

[Thunderknuckles]

Given the current world views of many in the teaching profession, I would say hell no.
I would say no in general just because I believe it is the parent's job to instill a sense of ethics and morality into their children.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Given the current world views of many in the teaching profession, I would say hell no.
I would say no in general just because I believe it is the parent's job to instill a sense of ethics and morality into their children. True but parents aren't doing it and the corruption is so great in media, television and film the kids do not get it there as they did 40/50 years ago. We are three generations removed from proper parental guidance being a norm and a well considered duty /activity in the family unit. Do you concede that something does need to be done ? -Tyr

[Thunderknuckles]

True but parents aren't doing it and the corruption is so great in media, television and film the kids do not get it there as they did 40/50 years ago. We are three generations removed from proper parental guidance being a norm and a well considered duty /activity in the family unit. Do you concede that something does need to be done ? -Tyr
I concede your point regarding a lack of parental guidance. I don't know what to do about it, if anything at all should be done.
I know one thing for sure: I don't want Hillary's idea of a "Village" looking after the well being of my children or anyone else's for that matter. If you think kids have an ethics deficit now, just wait till the "Village" gets a hold of them.

[cadet]

I was about to say yes, cause kids seem to be little shits these days. But... there's so many "ok to be gay" (in grade school) and liberal hippy teachers, that I wouldn't want my kids being taught any of that crap.

Honestly, I just think we need to bring back spanking when kids are being little shits. That'll teach enough ethics and morals as far as I'm concerned. Enough to stay in line anyway.

[red state]

I agree with points from TYR and TK. On one side of the matter, I believe the MORE our kids are subjected to (withholding indecency of course) the better our kids are. Yet, the other side of things could lead to a biased from both muSLUMS and Christians (for example). I do not believe there should be any sex or drug education (without an 'opt out option' from the parent). This is especially true when dealing with certain schools or areas who's main focus is on "tolerance" towards homosexuality and race issues with actual education placed in the back of the 'bus'. I also believe that FACT alone should be taught and teachers should be tested themselves ever-so-often. This could even be done by the TAX PAYERS who pay their salaries submitting legitimate questions regarding what they deem to be important and the best route in educating their kids. BUT if we are to subject our youth to "theories" it would be a healthy expansion to their minds to study, debate and choose which path of "ORIGINS" they have reasoned to be a better (THEORY).

I'm all for Home Schooling, Private Schooling and charter plans. I believe the teacher's unions and the grip that the leftists have placed upon our Nation's educational system is the #1 problem with our schools....that and an indifference parents have had over the years.

[red state]

CADET WROTE: I was about to say yes, cause kids seem to be little shits these days. But... there's so many "ok to be gay" (in grade school) and liberal hippy teachers, that I wouldn't want my kids being taught any of that crap.

Honestly, I just think we need to bring back spanking when kids are being little shits. That'll teach enough ethics and morals as far as I'm concerned. Enough to stay in line anyway.


Cadet, I couldn't agree more!!! If I had such an award....I'd present you with the SPOT ON AWARD! So, here's the best I can do until such an award exists.....

http://www.picgifs.com/sport-graphics/sport-graphics/archery/sport-graphics-archery-486510.gif

[aboutime]

Who would you trust to TEACH ethics to our children?

Political shills who are the Administrators of Public, Government Schools?

NEA Member Teachers who would happily teach Democrat/Obama Ethics.....that
DO NOT EXIST???

[Marcus Aurelius]

Ethics, like morals, should be taught in the home, by the parents. My children are moral and ethical, because of me.

[aboutime]

Ethics, like morals, should be taught in the home, by the parents. My children are moral and ethical, because of me.


Agree Marcus. And you have every right to be proud of what you are doing. But, we all know. Larger segments of our population suffers from a lack of Parents WHO are capable of teaching ethics, and morals themselves because...they were probably brought up in the very same kinds of broken, fatherless homes that plague our nation today.

It's a vicious circle that exists..outside of WE, the FEW who know, and recognize the importance of Family taught SELF-RESPECT, morals, and ethical living. But, for those millions of Americans who haven't got the advantages we have. They can only look to a FALSE PROPHET kind of morality...dressed in Promises Not Kept, but In Votes...stolen.

[Larrymc]

If so should those teachings be based upon biblical principles (Proverbs etc.)?? Not suggesting teaching religion just the ethical principles . Sure liberals/dems/leftists will cry holy murder about it but isn't that what our kids are missing and possibly why there is so much corruption, crime and filthy behavior in our society? And why not start teaching civics classes again? I see no good objections to either myself.. And as a great benefit both would counter the dire muslim menace we face! Tyr"NO" Something we've never had to even ask, Now needs be required, That is parents taking responsibility for their children, if they intentionally hurt someone or damage other peoples personal property, Its a shame people don't love their children enough to parent them, When we have a mass shooting by a youth and, all the signs of violent intentions , and paraphernalia or found "In Their Room" some body should be held responsible.I fell this started in the late 70s early 80s when we let what i call educated idiots tells us spanking was child abuse, and started snatching peoples kids left and right at the drop of a hat, They see it was a mistake now, but now we have generation's of parents that were never disciplined, because there parents feared having them taken, I think we need to make parents more responsible, of course now we would, have an abuse problem because, they don't have a clue what their doing

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I concede your point regarding a lack of parental guidance. I don't know what to do about it, if anything at all should be done.
I know one thing for sure: I don't want Hillary's idea of a "Village" looking after the well being of my children or anyone else's for that matter. If you think kids have an ethics deficit now, just wait till the "Village" gets a hold of them. Any true course on ethics would not be teaching any liberal principles. Certainly not teaching anything that comes from any Clinton. When suggesting a course on ethics I meant a true course not some PC TYPE bullshat. And same thing when I asked about teaching courses on civics again. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

"NO" Something we've never had to even ask, Now needs be required, That is parents taking responsibility for their children, if they intentionally hurt someone or damage other peoples personal property, Its a shame people don't love their children enough to parent them, When we have a mass shooting by a youth and, all the signs of violent intentions , and paraphernalia or found "In Their Room" some body should be held responsible.I fell this started in the late 70s early 80s when we let what i call educated idiots tells us spanking was child abuse, and started snatching peoples kids left and right at the drop of a hat, They see it was a mistake now, but now we have generation's of parents that were never disciplined, because there parents feared having them taken, I think we need to make parents more responsible, of course now we would, have an abuse problem because, they don't have a clue what their doing Parents today need to learn how to say --no-- to their kids. They need to stop rewarding their kids for lying, stealing and thinking solely of self. They need to adopt a fair and thoughtful corporal punishment policy. Yet this could not happen unless the parents were taught again themselves. So instituting a true civics/ethics course for the kids would be better IMHO. Of course that would require having real ethical and dedicated teachers especially trained to teach such courses. None of the standard "rejects" that are now so often being produced and foisted upon our kids.-Tyr

[Trinity]

Given the current world views of many in the teaching profession, I would say hell no.
I would say no in general just because I believe it is the parent's job to instill a sense of ethics and morality into their children.


It is the parent's job...however I have learned that most parent's don't have the time or energy...they would rather someone else do it, because they are to tired to do anything other then get up and go to work and grudgingly take the child to whatever extra curricular activity they have to take them to...

I find it quite saddening when I have a pregnant friend who is so excited about having a baby and then 3 weeks later decide that well I am so glad I can go back to work and get a break from my child....really.....hmmmm maybe you should have thought about that before having kids.

I was a stay at home mom until my boy's were older.... and I am grateful for every minute I got to spend with them...we learned so much from each other and still do. Kids that are raised by strangers in daycare......well.

[hjmick]

Judging by the shit we see in our politicians these days, I'll go with yes.

[aboutime]

If we allow members of the NEA Union to teach Ethics.

This may be what our children eventually face....5303

[logroller]

I would say yes to ethics, but no to morals. Ethical considerations depend on the context, so within a certain arena, ie the public one, ethics are certainly within the guise of public interests. Not so with morals; which are inherently, if not definitively, personal in nature. Morality, the innate sense of right and wrong, cannot be taught by school IMO-- you either have it or you do not. These views can change, just as people do over their lives, but a singular class would be unlikely to affect such change and would more likely result from a comprehensive array of exposure to a multitude of beliefs over a long period of time and myriad of settings-- not just school and certainly not a class. Ethics, however, if confined to certain paradigm, could work to th betterment of the student. By paradigm I mean a certain contextual view and this certainly varies depending upon the nature of the role. The ethics of being a doctor is different than the ethics of a businessman, or a public servant-- the ethics of good parenting is different than the ethics of a good friend and so on-- this is what an ethics class would explain. For what defines ethics is the culture or society at large, not the individual; and what constitutes an ethical act bears little consideration of the individual's prerogative as much as it does the societal expectations. To ordane upon society through public agency the power to instruct morality is an affront to personal liberty and will inevitably lead us to an outcome that is, ironically, immoral in and of itself.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I would say yes to ethics, but no to morals. Ethical considerations depend on the context, so within a certain arena, ie the public one, ethics are certainly within the guise of public interests. Not so with morals; which are inherently, if not definitively, personal in nature. Morality, the innate sense of right and wrong, cannot be taught by school IMO-- you either have it or you do not. These views can change, just as people do over their lives, but a singular class would be unlikely to affect such change and would more likely result from a comprehensive array of exposure to a multitude of beliefs over a long period of time and myriad of settings-- not just school and certainly not a class. Ethics, however, if confined to certain paradigm, could work to th betterment of the student. By paradigm I mean a certain contextual view and this certainly varies depending upon the nature of the role. The ethics of being a doctor is different than the ethics of a businessman, or a public servant-- the ethics of good parenting is different than the ethics of a good friend and so on-- this is what an ethics class would explain. For what defines ethics is the culture or society at large, not the individual; and what constitutes an ethical act bears little consideration of the individual's prerogative as much as it does the societal expectations. To ordane upon society through public agency the power to instruct morality is an affront to personal liberty and will inevitably lead us to an outcome that is, ironically, immoral in and of itself. Yes my question was about teaching ethics and not about morality as a whole. The two do overlap but a course could be designed to concentrate on ethical principles and not morality as in religious teachings. Same thing would apply with teaching civics and would be an even easier task to accomplish. Biggest problem would be in teaching the teachers how to teach the course. Especially in selecting the right kind of person to teach the subject. Now back in my grade school/elem years (the 60's) the teachers taught along with the subject ethics and morality. Not all of them but close to half did. We were wild bunch and perhaps they saw it was necessary. It surely did tone many of us down . As did the damn spankings. Not so much the pain as it was the shame of getting one.:laugh:. Hell, we had teachers that had paddles made from boat paddles, they reached back into Montana with their swing... . 5th and 6th grades sure were tough on our azzes.;) We need that today to settle many of these kids down IMHO. -Tyr

[logroller]

Yes my question was about teaching ethics and not about morality as a whole. The two do overlap but a course could be designed to concentrate on ethical principles and not morality as in religious teachings. Same thing would apply with teaching civics and would be an even easier task to accomplish. Biggest problem would be in teaching the teachers how to teach the course. Especially in selecting the right kind of person to teach the subject. Now back in my grade school/elem years (the 60's) the teachers taught along with the subject ethics and morality. Not all of them but close to half did. We were wild bunch and perhaps they saw it was necessary. It surely did tone many of us down . As did the damn spankings. Not so much the pain as it was the shame of getting one.:laugh:. Hell, we had teachers that had paddles made from boat paddles, they reached back into Montana with their swing... . 5th and 6th grades sure were tough on our azzes.;) We need that today to settle many of these kids down IMHO. -Tyr
Certainly the instructor needs to be capable, but I think the subject matter itself is what needs o be well-defined primarily. For example, kids are taught ethics to some degree from a very early age in school-- through rules that govern student behavior. Be it remaining quiet, seated or even through dress codes-- the ethical concept of proper behavior as necessary to a conducive learning environment abound. The issue, which you touched upon, is that ethical rules are only as effective as there is a consequence to their violation. When such is lacking or, perhaps worse, inconsistently applied, there is breakdown in the trust that all ethical concepts share at the societal level. Kids figure that out pretty early on. By way of example, how clichéd is the excuse "he hit me first"-- it's as commonplace a response as any, yet it offers insight into the moral precept of the golden rule-- a natural response that governs are sense of right and wrong. While ethics may dictate that one should turn the other cheek so as to prevent a domino-effect of ill-treatment, "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind", the moral precept inherent within natural justice (often) instructs one to rebuke the 'high-road' ethical response. Ethically, from the administrative perspective, both are deserving of punishment while morally one is inclined to place the blame upon the instigator.
To further complicate the matter, one must consider whether one conceptualizes an act as right or wrong. Examples of this distinction include things such as the age of majority, the Good Samaritan laws, insanity defenses and an abundance of mitigating circumstances that soften ethics, often with disegard to the staunch concepts of morality. For if one has repeatedly been treated poorly by, say, their caregiver, it becomes difficult to hold that person accountable for something that they have never been taught. To this end I believe schools can play a significant role, but beware the ides of march-- for what can surely result is a system of ethical concepts that some may find violates the sacrosanct. See: gay marriage. Surely there are many that see such as immoral, yet its as progressive a law as any that would seek to declare unethical an act between consenting adults based upon something so personal as their sexual preference. It's said that that morals are the fabric of a society, which would mean ethics are the pattern and cut. In a one size fits all model it's inevitable that not all one fabric is used and some different fabrics will surely make up the garment (society). While it may be traditional to hold the natural benefits of cotton and wool as sacrosanct, there are some benefits to synthetic alternatives...to say nothing of hemp. ;) but I digress.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Certainly the instructor needs to be capable, but I think the subject matter itself is what needs o be well-defined primarily. For example, kids are taught ethics to some degree from a very early age in school-- through rules that govern student behavior. Be it remaining quiet, seated or even through dress codes-- the ethical concept of proper behavior as necessary to a conducive learning environment abound. The issue, which you touched upon, is that ethical rules are only as effective as there is a consequence to their violation. When such is lacking or, perhaps worse, inconsistently applied, there is breakdown in the trust that all ethical concepts share at the societal level. Kids figure that out pretty early on. By way of example, how clichéd is the excuse "he hit me first"-- it's as commonplace a response as any, yet it offers insight into the moral precept of the golden rule-- a natural response that governs are sense of right and wrong. While ethics may dictate that one should turn the other cheek so as to prevent a domino-effect of ill-treatment, "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind", the moral precept inherent within natural justice (often) instructs one to rebuke the 'high-road' ethical response. Ethically, from the administrative perspective, both are deserving of punishment while morally one is inclined to place the blame upon the instigator.
To further complicate the matter, one must consider whether one conceptualizes an act as right or wrong. Examples of this distinction include things such as the age of majority, the Good Samaritan laws, insanity defenses and an abundance of mitigating circumstances that soften ethics, often with disegard to the staunch concepts of morality. For if one has repeatedly been treated poorly by, say, their caregiver, it becomes difficult to hold that person accountable for something that they have never been taught. To this end I believe schools can play a significant role, but beware the ides of march-- for what can surely result is a system of ethical concepts that some may find violates the sacrosanct. See: gay marriage. Surely there are many that see such as immoral, yet its as progressive a law as any that would seek to declare unethical an act between consenting adults based upon something so personal as their sexual preference. It's said that that morals are the fabric of a society, which would mean ethics are the pattern and cut. In a one size fits all model it's inevitable that not all one fabric is used and some different fabrics will surely make up the garment (society). While it may be traditional to hold the natural benefits of cotton and wool as sacrosanct, there are some benefits to synthetic alternatives...to say nothing of hemp. ;) but I digress. Certainly if ethics are taught and have the desired effect then moral judgments will be made. If not why teach ethics in the first place? Ethics , that is good ethics that teach right from wrong will by necessity teach morals based upon a set of values. And what values should be taught if not those that teach that good should triumph over evil? That law must overcome and subdue vengeance. That justice must prevail overall. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Surely there is no escaping commonly known and recognized moral codes that are as old as biblical history itself. The mitigation of the complexity of how rigid should be the ethics and principles taught with the human tendency to attempt to cover all bases with compassion and mercy must be solved at the start rather than delayed in a wait and see approach. This naturally would lead to having to have a complex and quite rigid system developed to avoid a desire(mistake of being) to be all inclusive. Seeking to cover all bases by expanding the size and scope of the teaching would lead to a weakening of the prescribed course and therefore render the results mediocre or possibly even worse. In other words, the course and principles must be limited and firm yet able to be applied to a very wide variety of complex problems be they current or future . As you cited the age old concept of an "eye for an eye" would present a problem. For it can not be dismissed as a solid negative. It is after all the basis for man's search for justice. As man instinctively knows unjust/wicked actions are not to be ignored and allowed to go unpunished. For their can be no justice if there is no punishment! Yet civilization must subdue vengeance and replace it with the Rule of Law. No civilization without the Rule of Law. So we come to the question of what ethics should be taught? What standards should be referenced and how firm are each in giving examples of punishment? A task that indeed becomes more and more complex as one considers how to set up the course. Hardly a task for a single person to accomplish unless they truly are gifted, a genius and extremely honorable. Even then it would be wise to have many other brilliant people review the course before using it IMHO. Now teaching civics classes would be a much easier task and course to create. And it would also be a great back up program for the ethics classes. Schools must be reformed and both would be a great start to that reformation.. -Tyr

[DragonStryk72]

If so should those teachings be based upon biblical principles (Proverbs etc.)?? Not suggesting teaching religion just the ethical principles . Sure liberals/dems/leftists will cry holy murder about it but isn't that what our kids are missing and possibly why there is so much corruption, crime and filthy behavior in our society? And why not start teaching civics classes again? I see no good objections to either myself.. And as a great benefit both would counter the dire muslim menace we face! Tyr

well, actually, we could use the declaration of independence as the ethicals base for the lesson, without bringing in religion. The ethical base is that all are born equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights.

The document itself provides a moral and ethical statement by itself by supposing that rights are the peoples' by nature of birth. its a sound place to start without tripping the whole religious thing.

I would also state that a solid home economics course could really help the longterm debt issues in this country.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

well, actually, we could use the declaration of independence as the ethicals base for the lesson, without bringing in religion. The ethical base is that all are born equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights.

The document itself provides a moral and ethical statement by itself by supposing that rights are the peoples' by nature of birth. its a sound place to start without tripping the whole religious thing.

I would also state that a solid home economics course could really help the longterm debt issues in this country. Making an economics course a mandatory requirement in high school would be a great idea. However first basic math would have to be properly taught and actually learned previously. I guess that destroys that plan.. ;) Teachers now have trouble teaching even the three r's.. Sad, just damn sad that I will have to go behind every teacher to reteach my son. I've already started 2 years ago and he doesn't even start first grade for 3 more weeks. Farther he progresses in school the greater the amount of re-teaching I'll have to do. --Tyr

[Perianne]

Teachers now have trouble teaching even the three r's..

Isn't that the truth!!! I started to school in a little country school in the 60's. Reading. Writing. Arithmetics. History. Social Studies. Music class. These are the courses that should still be taught. Somehow I made it through life just fine without sex education, queer studies, and Obama indoctrination.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Isn't that the truth!!! I started to school in a little country school in the 60's. Reading. Writing. Arithmetics. History. Social Studies. Music class. These are the courses that should still be taught. Somehow I made it through life just fine without sex education, queer studies, and Obama indoctrination. As did many hundreds of millions of us.. The shame is that now Obama indoctrination and extreme tolerance of bad behavior has been made the norm or else retribution follows for those that speak out against it. -Tyr