[BarryRX]

Originally Posted by casita37 View Post
"Oh" (I caught that.), I still say one religion should not stand out over others in a tax supported education. I also think the "political correctness" excuse gets a bad rap. Seems whenever an old, outdated or biased, belief draws attention, people like to play the politically incorrect card. There is nothing incorrect about treating all people fairly and equally.

I'm not sure what makes an old or outdated belief no longer valid, other than someone calling them such. I still support and believe in the founding principles of our country. I may be old fashioned but I have 5 relatives who fought for these principles in the Revolutionary War. I don't believe it was to support political correctness.
__________________

Because I agree with Casita37 completely, I will explain some beliefs and practices that were routine in this country but are now outdated. Slavery is no longer tolerated in this country, nor is treating women as second class citizens who do not have the right to vote. Calling black men "boys" is no longer acceptable nor is using the "N" word. Blurting out racial stereotypes is no longer acceptable. I am sure that those who opposed ending the above practices thought that those who wanted to end them were being politically correct. If my sister was born in the 1920's instead of the 1950's, there would have been very few professional career options open to her. Things change, and change is usually resisted, and the rallying cry of that resistance is often political correctness. Your relatives who fought in the Revolutionary war were probably subjects of King George III at the time, and it was quite "politically incorrect" to rebel if you were in New York colony, but quite politically correct if you were in the colony of Virginia. As to my friend Tommy's claim that this is banned in school, even if true, the author has the right to speak in any religious school that will have her, or for that matter on any street corner. With 5 churches on every corner, we cry about our loss of religious freedom. We have every right to practice our religion, we just don't have the right to impose it on others.

[dbussone]

Originally Posted by BarryRX

Originally Posted by casita37 View Post
"Oh" (I caught that.), I still say one religion should not stand out over others in a tax supported education. I also think the "political correctness" excuse gets a bad rap. Seems whenever an old, outdated or biased, belief draws attention, people like to play the politically incorrect card. There is nothing incorrect about treating all people fairly and equally.

I'm not sure what makes an old or outdated belief no longer valid, other than someone calling them such. I still support and believe in the founding principles of our country. I may be old fashioned but I have 5 relatives who fought for these principles in the Revolutionary War. I don't believe it was to support political correctness.
__________________

Because I agree with Casita37 completely, I will explain some beliefs and practices that were routine in this country but are now outdated. Slavery is no longer tolerated in this country, nor is treating women as second class citizens who do not have the right to vote. Calling black men "boys" is no longer acceptable nor is using the "N" word. Blurting out racial stereotypes is no longer acceptable. I am sure that those who opposed ending the above practices thought that those who wanted to end them were being politically correct. If my sister was born in the 1920's instead of the 1950's, there would have been very few professional career options open to her. Things change, and change is usually resisted, and the rallying cry of that resistance is often political correctness. Your relatives who fought in the Revolutionary war were probably subjects of King George III at the time, and it was quite "politically incorrect" to rebel if you were in New York colony, but quite politically correct if you were in the colony of Virginia. As to my friend Tommy's claim that this is banned in school, even if true, the author has the right to speak in any religious school that will have her, or for that matter on any street corner. With 5 churches on every corner, we cry about our loss of religious freedom. We have every right to practice our religion, we just don't have the right to impose it on others.

I didn't say I supported "practices" I support the principles upon which this country was founded you. You can find them in:
1) the Declaration of Independence
2) the Constitution, and
3) the Bill of Rights.

Please don't read anything else into my post.

[Walter123]

My fun meter is starting to go negative.

[dbussone]

Originally Posted by Walter123

My fun meter is starting to go negative.

Agreed. Signing off this thread.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Walter123

My fun meter is starting to go negative.

Originally Posted by dbussone

Agreed. Signing off this thread.

Well, this isn't a "fun" topic. It Is one which should evoke intelligent and dispassionate discussion.

[dbussone]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Well, this isn't a "fun" topic. It Is one which should evoke intelligent and dispassionate discussion.

Then posters should practice what you preach.

[Indydealmaker]

Originally Posted by casita37

"Oh" (I caught that.), I still say one religion should not stand out over others in a tax supported education. I also think the "political correctness" excuse gets a bad rap. Seems whenever an old, outdated or biased, belief draws attention, people like to play the politically incorrect card. There is nothing incorrect about treating all people fairly and equally.

I was raised to believe that the word God was universally applied as the belief in a supreme being regardless of the unique names for said supreme entity. Believing in a God does not have to exclude anyone except atheists. For those I have no retort.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by dbussone

Then posters should practice what you preach.

I asked a legitimate question earlier and you ignored it. I did not say your comments were wrong, I simply posed a question, (as devil's advocate, some would say literally) which was apparently, not to your liking.

[quirky3]

Originally Posted by BarryRX

Originally Posted by casita37 View Post
"Oh" (I caught that.), I still say one religion should not stand out over others in a tax supported education. I also think the "political correctness" excuse gets a bad rap. Seems whenever an old, outdated or biased, belief draws attention, people like to play the politically incorrect card. There is nothing incorrect about treating all people fairly and equally.

I'm not sure what makes an old or outdated belief no longer valid, other than someone calling them such. I still support and believe in the founding principles of our country. I may be old fashioned but I have 5 relatives who fought for these principles in the Revolutionary War. I don't believe it was to support political correctness.
__________________

Because I agree with Casita37 completely, I will explain some beliefs and practices that were routine in this country but are now outdated. Slavery is no longer tolerated in this country, nor is treating women as second class citizens who do not have the right to vote. Calling black men "boys" is no longer acceptable nor is using the "N" word. Blurting out racial stereotypes is no longer acceptable. I am sure that those who opposed ending the above practices thought that those who wanted to end them were being politically correct. If my sister was born in the 1920's instead of the 1950's, there would have been very few professional career options open to her. Things change, and change is usually resisted, and the rallying cry of that resistance is often political correctness. Your relatives who fought in the Revolutionary war were probably subjects of King George III at the time, and it was quite "politically incorrect" to rebel if you were in New York colony, but quite politically correct if you were in the colony of Virginia. As to my friend Tommy's claim that this is banned in school, even if true, the author has the right to speak in any religious school that will have her, or for that matter on any street corner. With 5 churches on every corner, we cry about our loss of religious freedom. We have every right to practice our religion, we just don't have the right to impose it on others.

Thanks Barry! That's a very effective explanation about the concept of (and chronic misuse of) political correctness.

[Abby10]

Tommy, I want to thank you for your OP. Despite all the negativity that your post seems to have stirred, I do not feel that you posted in vain. I personally know several people who either have a special needs child or work with special needs children to whom I am going to recommend this book. I hope that your post also reaches out to others like them and that they also purchase the book. Although I do not have a copy of the book myself to peruse, I have read the reviews online about it and do not see that it is a "religious" book. Although the author's faith is mentioned, it does not seem to be the basis for writing the book. IMHO, the school seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill - nothing unusual in this world today - but I say "shame on them" because I think they may be doing a real disservice by banning this book. It seems to be a very unique read and could be very inspirational for those who have special needs children, those who work with them, and those of us in this world who have a heart for these children and the very special families that raise them.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Abby10

Tommy, I want to thank you for your OP. Despite all the negativity that your post seems to have stirred, I do not feel that you posted in vain. I personally know several people who either have a special needs child or work with special needs children to whom I am going to recommend this book. I hope that your post also reaches out to others like them and that they also purchase the book. Although I do not have a copy of the book myself to peruse, I have read the reviews online about it and do not see that it is a "religious" book. Although the author's faith is mentioned, it does not seem to be the basis for writing the book. IMHO, the school seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill - nothing unusual in this world today - but I say "shame on them" because I think they may be doing a real disservice by banning this book. It seems to be a very unique read and could be very inspirational for those who have special needs children, those who work with them, and those of us in this world who have a heart for these children and the very special families that raise them.

Sorry, but having read all the posts I am not aware of any that are "negative" as such. I am a friend of Tommy's and I respect his stand though I do not totally agree with it. Expressing differing opinions in a respectful manner or asking people to make their stance clear is not negative, but the basis upon which this country was founded. When we can't have respectful debate or try for understanding of differing views, we get the federal government we are currently saddled with. I commend you for recommending this book for parents of special needs children, and I would also. It is one thing however to recommend, or buy a book, and another to introduce it into a public school. BTW, all three of my kids graduated from high schools with church ties, and I would have been fine with them requiring a book such as this to be read.

[Abby10]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Sorry, but having read all the posts I am not aware of any that are "negative" as such. I am a friend of Tommy's and I respect his stand though I do not totally agree with it. Expressing differing opinions in a respectful manner or asking people to make their stance clear is not negative, but the basis upon which this country was founded. When we can't have respectful debate or try for understanding of differing views, we get the federal government we are currently saddled with. I commend you for recommending this book for parents of special needs children, and I would also. It is one thing however to recommend, or buy a book, and another to introduce it into a public school. BTW, all three of my kids graduated from high schools with church ties, and I would have been fine with them requiring a book such as this to be read.

I agree with some of what you say, especially the highlighted part above. I love a good debate myself and find there is often a lot to be learned from someone with differing views. Sometimes, however, I don't always think the projected stance taken on TOTV on threads such as this are always done in a very respectful manner. In other words, instead of a "debate" it becomes a "baiting". So as not to hijack this thread however, I'll get back to the OP's original concern and wrap up by saying that I still don't get the rejection of this book. It does not appear to be focused on the author's specific religion. The problem seems to be the simple mention of God and the author's general faith. Why would any school, public or not, be so adamant that God never even be mentioned? Again, I say it's overkill regarding the banning of a book.

[MikeV]

I had originally avoided this thread but unfortunately I got curious what the discussion was. Now I know why my first thoughts were valid. Bye.

[blueash]

I wonder if the OP could post additional information. What was the reason a school became involved? What form did "banning" take? Did a teacher want to assign all the students to read this book? Did the author want to donate it to the school library? Banned could mean so many different things. What is the age of the students at the school. My internet search found no stories at all about banning this book, other than hits to this thread.

[Tom Hannon]

I am sorry for posting such a contoversal post. Doing so, is not my norm. When I first posted my rant on TOTV it was just that.... a rant,and I should have been more specific. Since posting, I contacted June to discuss the ban. It was actually the library that banned the book. Not the school.
The title "Yo God, Jay's Story" had nothing to do with religion. Yo God, was just a saying Jonathan (his birth name) said when he got exited. Although there is mention of June questioning the higher power when Her son's health got worse and medical professionals were not being honest with her. She watched her son die slowly and she needed to blame someone. Actually June is a highly religious person. She plays organ and sings at the church and is highly motivated in other church functions. Faith in God has nothing to do with her story, a story everyone who has walked down that dark path should read.
My complaint is, This story is writen from her heart and her shared experiences could help others cope with a similar situation. Banning this book is a mistake. PS. I was influential in assisting June choose a title. I saw no reason of it being so offensive.