*
See first post, here is a kid that I can agree with.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
By considering things like energy-efficient mechanicals, window orientation, and renewable energy sources, homes can be evaluated to meet the energy codes. Here's what the IRC has to say.
Featured Video
SawStop's Portable Tablesaw is Bigger and Better Than BeforeHighlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
All over the United States, all over the world everywhere you can find newspapers, religions, priests, parents and politicians claiming to know the truth about issues, problems or facts. Everyone is out looking for the truth, and a lot are out there claiming to know the truth: Television shows, radio shows, Internet websites, commentary articles and newspaper stories sway public opinion.
Look back to the book of Genesis in the Bible and see how the serpent deceived Eve into eating the fruit which had terrible consequences. Alternatively, look back to the 1930s, when Adolf Hitler began to rise to power. He brainwashed people into his regime and quickly rose to the highest position in Germany. That single man created one of the bloodiest wars in all of history, because people did not know the truth.
However, along with the subject of truth, there are also issues of honesty, integrity and character all of which we need in our political and religious leaders, teachers and parents. I believe that an honest man will refuse to lie, steal or deceive in any way. To be honest is to have an upright character this is something that is extremely lacking in our society today. Integrity is especially lacking in our government. A man with integrity is someone who has sound convictions and moral values. Last, I look at character: Merriam-Webster's dictionary says, "[A man with character is someone with] moral excellence and firmness."
The truth is something that is essential in our society today and lacking. The founding fathers of this great nation believed that only men with high moral character, integrity and honesty should hold the presidency or any other public office. John Adams, the nation's second president, said, "Our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
This week, I asked five people how they could tell if someone was not telling them the truth or the whole truth. I got five answers back saying they could not. I also asked the same five if they trusted the media in telling them the whole truth and not fabrications. I got five answers back saying they did not trust the media. In addition, I asked them if they believed the politicians and the now-elected officials in public office. Some said it depended on the party, some said it depended on the person, and one stated, "50-50."
One word comes to mind: vulnerability. If the citizens of America rely on the biased media and politicians, with their own agenda, that leaves us extremely vulnerable.
It's a perfect example of the boy who cried wolf. If, for example, you lie to your friend and he becomes aware it was a lie, your friendship is over, or that trust you once had is gone. However, we can't leave the media; we rely on them to give us the news, and there aren't any other options.
When Pilate was judging Jesus, Jesus said, "Everyone on the side of truth listens to me." "What is the truth?" Pilate asked. Little did he know that the truth was standing right before him. Sometimes the truth is standing right before us, and we cannot even see it because the person telling it is biased or not telling the real story.
I try to cut through the rhetoric and get the real story. My column title, "Veritas," is Latin for "the truth." This is my area not only to voice my opinion, but to try my best to get to the truth. This is also a column where you can have a unique view from an aware 12-year-old.
Growing up in a family that is anchored, that taught me right from wrong and good moral values, I am thankful. I base my values on what my parents taught me, as well as the Bible. I have a God-given talent, and I am using it to the best of my ability.
I picked the name Veritas, because I feel that in the world there is a lot of deceit, especially when it comes to handling the news. I want the real story I always have, and I always will.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Williams is 12 years old, home-schooled and lives in a rural community in America's heartland. His column title, "VERITAS
*Huh?.....Maybe Kyle could write curriculum for the masses....
*Precocious 12-year old. Not bad thoughts, but what are we, the current generation-in-charge, doing about it? By and large, I've found people in the federal government to be just a cross-section of America: from honorable and principled to self-serving and venal. And yet you watch TV and buy the products. Otherwise, they wouldn't do it. The Awakening will come when we discover we live in a bubble.TC
*To me it's silly. I challange the premise that there are lots of people claiming to know the truth and that everyone is out looking for it. Aside from Rush and Falwell, I can't think of too many people claiming to know the truth. The media doesn't make this claim and only foolish people would presume that they do. Shoot, every story is reported from numerous perspectives, so any thinking adult would KNOW that none of them are posited as "truth." Any thinking adult knows that all situations can be seen from different perspectives, none of which is individually the truth, but the aggregation of which is probably as close as we'll come. But most people aren't even looking for that anyway--they're looking for the interpretation of events that best supports their perspective of the world. He's gonna "get to the truth"? Bullshit. As he says, you'll get the unique view of a 12-year old. Kinda presumptious and arrogant to equate that to the truth.Jim
*Shoot, If I had been able to distribute what I thought as a 12 year old, this world would have been in trouble.....Arrogance at its worse.....Maybe I'm just jealous that a 12 year old could dictate what we believe and I spent 15 years pursuing a degree that says I at "least" know something.......Forgive me for my arrogance...
*"I challange the premise that there are lots of people claiming to know the truth and that everyone is out looking for it." What do they present their ideas as, lies, and what are thinking adults looking for, more lies? The kid probably won't write curriculum for a few years, but at least he can read, write and articulate his thoughts in an ordered manner, more than I can say for many that far exceed him in age and experience. Refreshing, to say the least.
*I see some presumptious and arrogant adults finding fault with writings from the perspective of a 12 year old.
*That is impressive thoughts and writings for a 12 year old. My hat's off to him, regardless if I believe his thoughts are accurate or not.James DuHamel
*BB, are truth and lies the only options? Every statement has to be one or the other? If someone reports that 5000 people were killed at WTC have they lied be/c the real number is a few more or less? Or should they say nothing till the one absolute number is known? Are those their only options? Should GWB detail our bombing plans? If not, he fails Master William's definition of honesty. It's sad to me when one must see everything as only truth or lie, good or evil. It's worse when adults encourage that type of thinking in children. I'll give the kid an A for proper grammar and fine vocabulary. But I'd give him a different grade for thinking skills. My guess, which I guess is a lie be/c I don't know the whole truth, is that he's parroting what his teachers are telling him (and he's homeschooled, so his teachers are...), and that voice resonates with the conservative crowd (a TN college student) that web-published his writings.Pi, nothing was directed at you. Forgive me if it sounded such. I used "arrogance" to describe someone, age be damned, who said all others lie but I will tell you the truth. Here's another sample of his "truth":>"Sharpton received a mere 1% of the votes in a Democratic poll conducted several months ago. This sounds to me like another publicity stunt by just one more NAACP left-wing Liberal. >In addition, by me making some rather obvious statements I will most likely be labeled as another right-wing whacko prejudice against African-Americans. This is simply not the case. I would not care if Al Sharpton was white, black, green, red or orange; it is the fact that he is another left-wing extremist, lying, hypocritical, Liberal. >This sounds like an advertising campaign and I seriously doubt that Al Sharpton will follow through. Listen Al, want some publicity? Go face the Taliban with Jesse Jackson. "Truth or Dogma? No agenda here, such as he claims of all others? Pshaw. His premise is faulty and his conclusions follow from his premise. Just another Rush wannabe.
*Actually, the column is not all that well written. Reread it closely, and you'll find all sorts of grammatical errors and badly constructed paragraphs.An example: the fourth paragraph starts with a topic sentence but veers to a related but distinct topic.The column is also full of logical inconsistencies and false conclusions (regardless of the validity of the premises.)Not too bad for a 12 year old, but any adult who is educated and makes the effort to critically read it will soon realize that "not too bad for a 12 year old" doesn't make it in an educated adult world.It occurs to me that one of the potential problems with home schooling is the limited perspective one is likely to be exposed to. (OK, "... to which one is likely to be exposed.")All of the home schooled kids I have met have been very nice, polite kids. There is a great deal to be said for nice and polite, although I worry about kids who don't question enough.Within the limited perspective of home schooling, though, isn't one likely to be taught "this is the truth and anything else is lies and evil"?Looking at his "he is another left-wing extremist, lying, hypocritical, Liberal" quoted in Cloud's message suggests that he's not too high on the "respect other's beliefs" scale.Apparently, he doesn't understand that there is a difference between a "left wing extremist" and a "Liberal." I suspect (hope) he understands that there is a difference between a "conservative" and a "Fascist." However, it seems in his world view, anything left of center is evil.(Come to think of it, his views seem right at home here in Breaktime!)
*Ralph, you're right......I was feeling arrogant when I read it......It's not that I can't appreciate the perspective of a 12 year old, but 1...I don't believe a 12 year old wrote and 2.....I find it arrogant that his perspective presumes that if our parents are not god fearing people and we can't quote the Bible verbatim, we're evil...
*Cloud, nothing to forgive......Sometimes I read too much into some posts.....As I said, I don't believe a 12 year old wrote it(errors and all) and I have great trouble with dogma of any kind.....
*Jzus! Pickin on a 12 yr old kid Bob? If he "truly" wrote it then an "educated" person,(by the way, what is an educated person?) wouldn't pick his essay apart. I think an "educated" person would read into the context to see what the young fella might be feeling or understanding in this complicated world. Instead of disecting a kid's paragraphs, how about looking for his 12 yr old meaning?
*If someone writes weekly opinion columns and publishes them on a site that describes itself as "about as conservative as you can get" and whose motto is "crushing liberalism" and the content of what he writes under the inflated title "Veritas" is drivel that parrots his mom and Rush and doesn't hold together logically, then he gets a free pass be/c he's 12? Gimme a break.If he pretends to be a serious columnist, then his writings can be examined as such.If I found a 12-year old liberal home-schooled kid who published weekly defenses of the ACLU, Clinton, or whatever you find suspect, you'd say, "Awww, what a nice polite educated child?" Ha ha ha.He's no different than the 6-yr-old I saw who was preaching to the Pakastini militant crowds under the direction of Extreme Fundamentalist Islam clerics. Hardly precocious, just more willing than most to repeat things told to him by adults. His parents are doing a great job of raising a dittohead.
*ibcnya:I don't think I was picking on a 12 year old; at least that wasn't my intent: for example, I said "Not bad for a 12 year old" or something like that.My concern is with the "educated adults" who read that drivel and thinks it's good or demonstrates any insight of any value in the adult world!BTW, for those who think he's merely parroting his parents: ain't necessarily so. My 14 year old daughter went through a stage at 11-12 where she argued against evolution and in favor of creationism being taught as a science! She sure didn't get that idiocy at home (and she was bright enough to outgrow it fairly quickly.)
*Wait a minute, I take it all back! They're all geniuses there!Our esteemed commentator is prescient:"Tuesday, August 11, 8:30 AM, I received a phone call from my dad saying that a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center ...."Another commentator has informed us "MTV has set out to make environmentalism and socialism trendy by appealing to their under 25 audience. They are preparing a whole new generation to accept the Communist philosophy."MTV as a communist agent! You've gotta love it! Half of the stuff on that site looks like it came straight from the Onion site!Thank you for turning us onto that site Brisket! In this, America's darkest hour, with our leaders telling us to get on with our lives, that site is the best source of inanity I've seen. Comedy Channel, watch out!
*That site is really incredible: here's another good one: [Because of] "the tax cut of Ronald Reagan back in 1981, five years later we went from deficits to ending up in the black," http://voxpox.com/?BISKIT=604156453&CONTEXT=cat&cat=78A quick Google search gives the lie to that one; for example, at end of the 1985 deficit was 1,945,941,616,459.88, at the end of 1986 it was $2,214,834,532,586.43.In short terms it i increasedby about 269 b billiondollars.So, they can't even come close on their facts.I suppose that it helps explain a lot when you realize they have confused a budget deficit increase of 269 billion dollars for a claimed budget deficit decrease of the 1.9 trillion dollars it would have taken to go into the black!
*Hey, nobody gave Eve a free pass for one little, youthful, experimental nibble...
*youthful, experimental nibbleMotivated by genuine intellectual curiosity, too, IIRC!
*And the first proof that P.T. Barnum was right. There is one born every minute.
*That kid kind of reminds me of the Hitler Youth.
*You'll think I'm nitpicking but he misquoted John Adams, who did not say:* "Our constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." He actually said (emphasis mine):* "Our constitution was made only for b a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." To me, that b 'a 'makes a difference. In other words Adams was speaking i generally about Americans as a whole(as a generally moral and religious society) and not about how specific individuals should prove themselves worthy of our form of government (as implied).It is the difference between saying "We are a great people" and "We are great people" which involves two different meanings.Jeff
*As in Neil Armstrong's speach on the moon:He said: One small step for man, a giant leap for mankind."What he meant to say: One small step for A man, a giant leap for mankind."Mike
*"You'll think I'm nitpicking but he misquoted John Adams"That's not a nitpick. That's a significant misquote, IMHO.
*Something like that makes you wonder if it was an error of omission or comission. Did he think it proved his point better that way (Hey, let's rewrite the words of our founding fathers to serve today's needs) or did he just copy it from a source that itself conveniently changed the meaning? Inquiring minds wanna know. BB, check up on it and get back to us!
*Very possibly he misquoted because he misread the quote. The way he used it, the quote is in perfect alignment with his ideas. If he noticed that little "a" it would have complicated things for him. I hope someone somewhere points it out to him, kindly. That's how we learn.
*>I hope someone somewhere points it out to him, kindly.I nominate Lisa. You're kind. Here's his email: [email protected]. Let us know what he says. Warning: here's one columnist's invitation to discussion: "Once you've read the article, I assume you agree with me, you can discuss it with fellow VoxPox members."
*LOL! OK, I'll do it. My maternal instinct kicking in.BB - I don't see this column on the VoxPox website. Do you know the date or the title of the column? Or do they have a column archive? Can't really refer to it as "the column of yours that appeared in the Tavern".
*ibcnya,Are you implying that Bob is Book-Smart but Street-Dumb?Pete
*Lisa, That is not his e-mail address, I have contacted Kyle and given him the information, and the link to this site in case he chooses to engage in direct discussion with this assortment of educated critics.
*Cloud; On true and false tests in school, the Nuns required one or the other, there was no third choice. Generalizations and estimates should not affect the perception of ones veracity, and context should dictate whether it is an attempt at precision or a quess. There are absolutes, regardless of individual opinions.
*Jeff; I think the misquote has very little bearing on the boys message, and that Adams was actually refering to the character of the leaders that would be involved in the operation of the government, more than society as a whole. As you will notice, as the general integrity of society continues to diminish,leaders included,liberty is injured as well.
*"On true and false tests in school, the Nuns required one or the other, there was no third choice."What about when the question was improperly worded or a true/false answer wasn't appropriate. E.g.: "The sky is blue." False right now in NW Ohio, true yesterday, false last night ....""There are absolutes, regardless of individual opinions."Yupper. Let's see.... The world is flat. The sun revolves around the earth. (If I recall those nuns and their buddies had some problems with that one.) You can't split the atom. There can only be one line through any given point parallel to a given straight line. You can't draw more than one straight line through two points.*BB, Yes indeed, life would be perfect if there were absolutes. Must be pretty frustrating and scary to realize it doesn't work that way.If God hadn't wanted people to be scared and ignorant, he wouldn't have given us sand.If you believe in Euclidean geometry, those are true. If you believe in Lobachevskian geometry, the first one is false. If you believe in Riemann geometry, the first b andsecond are false.According to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, Riemann geometry best describes the world we live in!
*Thanks, Bob, you did better than I was gonna.I'll add one: True or False? A triangle can have more than one right angle. Well, depends...How big's the deficit?What will be next year's GDP growth?Can prayer divert a hurricane away from Pat Robertson's house?Who's gonna run for Gov of PA?The answer to all is "it depends" but all warrant reporting. In fact each can have multiple right answers. Anyone who says they know or represent the truth is scary, or silly, or pulling your leg. And when it comes to the media, the things that warrant reporting and commentary are more like the questions I've posed than those your nuns pose. As I recall, the discussion you started was about media and politicians, not teachers and textbooks. A lot fewer absolute truths and true/false questions in real life than in a Catholic school, I suspect.
*And just what is so wrong about wanting to know and learn? The whole Eve is evil because she ate of the tree of knowledge slant on the Genesis story is essentially saying the quest for knowledge is wrong and ignorance is good. That in itself is a foolish philosophy. The desire to understand and learn is the most human thing about us as a species. It is what can enoble us and allows the idea of wrong and right.I agree with the folks who saw an uberconservative cast on a 12 year old's uncritical thought processes. Parroting the far rights prejudices and like most children, unable to discern shades of gray. That's why they are minors and do not have full rights. They aren't old enough to make good decisions when presented with challenging situations. Unfortunatly, he will never learn since those surrounding him feed his inflated ego by telling him how right he is in his extreme and childish view of the world. Why do you think Jesus spoke in parables and gave so many contradictory casts on situations - the world is not black and white, right and wrong. There are many shades of gray and many difficult decisions one must make to thread one's way through life. This kid will not learn that and his essay champions the intolerance native to children.Also, John Adams was wrong about the constitution. In over 200 years of use, it has proven itself to be the perfect government for an immoral and irreligious people. Because it balances power and pits the 3 arms of the government against each others plus ensures a free press to keep the government open (the 4 estates), it keeps the all too imperfect human vices in check. No other government has ever been so effective in curtailing tyrany while keeping the general populace free. We have been rewarded with material riches more generally distributed than in any other form of government (and I include all the democracies and republics of the world in this). The founding fathers were a fractious bunch who truly did not know where the great experiment would lead. They were not gods to whom we must bow down as delivering eternal truths with their every statement. Our governemnt works regardless of whether the people are moral and religious or not or somewhere inbetween.Mary
*BB:"I have contacted Kyle and given him the information, and the link to this site in case he chooses to engage in direct discussion with this assortment of educated critics."Cool. Tell him to bring some of his ass-kickin' liberal crushin' buddies along. They're mighty tough in their own neighborhood, let's see how they do outside the gatesYou might want to suggest he leave behind the idiot who claimed Reagan put the government in the black after 5 years. That'd make it too easy!
*Mary, Hear! Hear! Well put, indeed
*I'm just street smart enough to know there are some streets which I ought to avoid!
*bb,No, the misquote is the subliminal message that we only deserve to live in America if we are moral and religious people, individually. It has everything to do with what is being said and we are not so easily fooled by what comes out 'from the mouths of babes.'I do agree that the 'general integrity of society' is an important issue. How might that be measured? Personally I think it's pretty high in the US right now and the state of liberty, as long as it is left to flourish, is alive and well too.Here is an example (I hope) of the celebration of the roots of our liberty and respect for our founders - in case you feel that I comment on this issue from a disengaged viewpoint. Click here for a photograph.Jeff
*From the mouths of babes....Sometimes comes wisdom.Sometimes comes what was put there by malicious bigoted, sanctimonious, hate-mongers. (From both sides of 'center'.)
*Reading the world as "black and white" absolutes is what enables teenagers to be right all the time. The world can take on an almost mathamatical symplicity.The older I get, the more I realize how much I don't know. Most people, given time and experience, come to this realization I think."Truth" is subjective. The best we can do is become critical thinkers, digest viewpoints across the sprectrum of thought/media, and try to draw conclusions and decern what each believes the "truth" to be. In the end, the sum of our society's perceived "truth's" leads us to the moderate center of puplic opinion. That is why our democracy and 4 Estates is such a good system.Sorry for rambling
*Mary, ITA!I must admit I've never thought of the Eve/apple situation that way, but it makes perfect sense.From "religion's" perspective, the last thing it wants is people to start poking holes in the fabric of it's existence.That is precisely why we hear expressions like: "God works in mysterious ways", "God write straight with crooked lines", and "Wise men are often confused by simple things". When translated, all are: I don't know, but admitting that casts doubt as to God's existence, benevolence, and/or power.I have nothing to add about the rest of your post you haven't said already, and well.
*No apology needed Stray. ITA. Well put.Mike
*What Bob said! (Except that I would note that Canada too enjoys a stable, prosperous democracy, a free press, and is unthreatened by tyranny, without benefit of a Constitution.)
*heard an interesting historical tidbit...see if i remember the salient facts...when the delegates were ready to vote on adopting the constitution.... they were notified to assemble... one of the delegates from RI , named Green(e)... was adamant that RI would not vote for the Constitution...as he was getting into his carriage to start his journey ... one of his pigs got loose.. so he reigned in and took out after the pig...pigs being the ornery critters they are.. he soiled his linens... and had to return to the house to launder his clothes...needless to say.. he was late for the vote..and the Constition was adopted by one vote.. without Green(e)......hurray for pigs !
*"The whole Eve is evil because she ate of the tree of knowledge..."Only problem with this is that that's not what Genesis says. It says "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil". The effect of eating from it was not intellectual development - it was that they became ashamed of themselves.
*Thanks BB. I know you were kind. I hope the adults in his life let him read it, as it is always important to quote people accurately.
*Bob;where did the Reagan story come from?
*Bob; What site are you talking about?
*Yes there are absolutes. There are moral absolutes, even though they are ignored and denied by reprobates and others that don't choose to acknoweledge authority when it isn't in agreement with their lifestyles. Example, it is imoral to murder another person, it is also imoral to steal from another person, there are many other moral absolutes.There are natural absolutes also, as quoted in the first book, things reproduce after their own kind, I have never harvested a cucumber from a plant that was grown from a watermellon seed. My wifes dogs don't ever have kittens,they absolutly only produce more dogs.The Nuns that taught me in school, along with any other moderatly inteligent person had the ability to pose questions that were true or false. The young man that introduced himself as a seeker of truth, hit a raw nerve with humanists and those that find it inconvienent to acknowledge that there are such things as truth, integrity and honesty. And the response to blame his parents and limbaugh for his conservative, or moral views, as if they were poison is very typical of the lefties, attack the messenger and ignore the message. If he would of been a government schooled 12 year old he probably would of written about skateboarding or some other important issue instead.
*To a 12 year, skateboarding IS important, and should be.
*>very typical of the leftiesI'm a leftie, born that way, and proud of it. But we always spelled it lefty, or southpaw. Just like Randy Johnson. What's wrong with being left-handed? I even used that hand to vote for Reagan, which is ironic as hell if you think about it.
*Warning - Biblical stuff ahead! Read at your own risk, or pass on by if you prefer.BB - I'm not going to pick apart, line by line, an essay written by a 12 year old kid. Bless his heart. But your statement that anyone who does not agree with Kyle is either a humanist, valueless, immoral, and/or a "leftie" is dismissive and inaccurate. In fact, the only certainty that I can come up with is that anyone who does not agree with Kyle is not Kyle.As a "righty" and a Christian, I find his essay to be full of judgemental statements ("therefore let us stop passing judgement on one another" Romans 14:13), prideful statements ("Pride goes before destruction" Proverbs 16:18), and disrespectful statements ("show proper respect to everyone: love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king" 1Peter 2:17).He says he is a truth seeker who bases his values on the Bible. I think he would be more effective in his column if he considered:"Let your gentleness be evident to all" Phil. 4:5"in humility consider others better than yourselves" Phil 2:3"Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry" James 1:19Kyle is a child and speaks like a child, which is perfectly normal. But I wonder if he realizes it? Somehow I don't think so.
*Lisa,Hugs and kisses. Though I probably _am_ a humanist, valueless, immoral, and a leftie (though the relevance of my writing hand still befuddles me), I think you nailed it about as well as can be done.I couldn't think of a serious way to respond to BB, be/c he incredulously took Veritas as serious journalism (or column-ism) and couldn't look beyond beliefs to see flawed logic and flawed presentation (independent of beliefs), even for a 12 year old. I've seen similar flaws in essays by my same-aged nephews, which is why they are in school and being taught how to write better, not just how to write what appeals to mommy and like-minded groupies. The problem here is not the child, but the adults who discourage any form of critical thinking.
*BB you make my point unwittingly:You propose "it is imoral to murder another person" as an example of a moral absolute-What about bombing taliban troops in Afghanistan?-what about killing an attacker who threatens your child's life?-what about the police shooting a man on a rooftop who's spraying bullets into a crowd?"it is also imoral to steal from another person"-If you were a starving peasant in Iraq, would it be imoral for you to steal a loaf of bread off the back doorstep of Saddam Hussain in order to feed your malnurished children?Your assertion about absolutes....is absolute crap.(IMO)
*Wonderful, Lisa! Thank you! (FWIW, in my experience there is nobody on the face of the earth quite so positive he/she has an exclusive monopoly on Truth, Righteousness and All the Answers All the Time as a bright 12-year-old.)
*Just for you - taken out of context, devoid of its original meaning and changed to fit the situation:"And if your left hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away" Matt. 5:30 (kinda, sorta, but not really anthing like it....)
*But what do you do if your right causes you to sin?Mary
*Somebody from the taliban takes you and your whole family to a stadium originaly built for sports, and shoots you all in the head on the 50 yard line.
*A true dilemna - LOL! Does this remind anybody else of an old movie - maybe Gene Wilder - distant memory in my brain - where some guy kept messing up and getting body parts chopped off as punishment, and eventually he was just a head hopping around? Anybody? I sure hope someone else remembers this......might have been a dream I had.....anybody?
*i in my experience there is nobody on the face of the earth quite so positive he/she has an exclusive monopoly on Truth, Righteousness and All the Answers All the Time as a bright 12-year-oldYep! And sometimes it lasts until they are a LOT older than that!
*Monty Python- The Black Knight(?)- Do you give up yet?
*BB:I spent some time cruising the VoxPox site. The things I quoted come from various "columns" there. One of Kyles, one from another writer.
*bb:"We must remember that Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt, his right hand man, opposed the tax cut of Ronald Reagan back in 1981, b five years later we went from deficits to ending up in the black, so we can tell by precedent that Tom Daschle’s statement is thus incorrect." [emphasis added]Its the second paragraph at this voxpox page:http://voxpox.com/?BISKIT=604156453&CONTEXT=cat&cat=78
*'Scuse me here for interrupting, because I was enjoying the conversation, but are we doing HTML here, Jeff? You just made your own hyperlink there--I can do that? Cool.Go back to what you were saying.
*And now, of course, we are living in the online world where a 12 year old's essay gets 'published,' and not in the school newspaper. And gets more attention than it perhaps deserves. The great thing about the Web is that we have easy access to all kinds of stuff to talk about and people with whom to discuss it. The not so great thing about the Web is....? I hope the 12 year old doesn't join this discussion. He needs to be spending time in the library, not spending time thinking that he is quite as important as he is allowed to think he is. Unfortunately my Dad still has stuff stored away that I wrote when I was 12; fortunately it's on paper, and it won't be around to embarrass me.He's 12. He's somewhat verbally sophisticated. Maybe he's home-schooled but, he is scarcely 'educated' yet, and maybe he will become so.
*>fortunately it's on paper, and it won't be around to embarrass me.Unless you run for pres or something. Then it'll be part of "The Theodora Papers: The Early Years". Better go burn it today. Of course then you'll be accused of destroying evidence. So basically, you're screwed.
*Hmmmm,Given my age 12 musings, well, at least I'd have the votes of the humanist, valueless, immoral lefties that were in the DAvid Cassidy fanclub.
*I was more for Susan Dey. MUCH more.
*But of course!But to take it back to the topic, here in online world, children have little protection as well as a lot of good opportunities. I don't have kids and I'm not a teacher of kids, so maybe those who are can chime in here. What does it do to a kid's intellectual abilities to think that their writings are.....I can't figure out how to say this without being patronizing. Everyone on the Web is an equal in terms of ability and opportunity to have their views published. That can be good. Can it be bad? Is it better to have a world where kids practice their ideas out on each other and in the presence of good teachers, before they are loosed upon the world?Is it fair for this kid to compete intellectually on an even par with the discussants on this forum, and elsewhere, even if he feels he has a right and an ability to? Is it worth our time?I am not advocating here, just exploring and questonning, because I don't know for sure what I think about this yet.I do believe that you should listen to kids. They have good ideas, and they shouldn't be censored or ghettoized. But this kid is presenting himself as a "finished product." And does this medium allow him to think that more easily than a kid would have in the past?
*We're just a backyard beer bash here. We can talk about anything and anyone without fear of being taken too seriously. It's no more appropriate for a 12 yo to be here than for Colin Powell to show up and ask us the details of the nano-nuke suggestions.The disservice being done to this 12 yo is that he's being taught to be a lazy thinker. The board on which he "publishes" his rantings purports to be a place for serious commentary, yet is rife with misspellings, bad grammar, and many assorted errors of logic and English. No one, including the adults who bankroll it, is enforcing standards of any sort (other than the standard that you can't be too conservative). How can a child learn in this environment? I blame the adults, not the child.If he, or anyone, wants to come here and "compete" with a bunch of half-drunken builders and builder-wannabes, more power to him (but no one better buy Kyle a drink or you'll go to cyber-jail). What purpose it'd serve? None I can think of. The only thing I'd discuss with him is how to improve grammar, spelling, sentence structure, paragraph formation, and fact-finding and verification, be/c it's obvious his parents and "editors" are falling down on that job.
*I'd tell the kid to get his butt outside and do some skateboarding.
*and go listen to some Pink Floyd, with the volume turned waaaaaay up!
*"We don't need no edgycayshun""We don't need no thought control"...."Hey ! Preacher ! Leave those kids alone"i Ok, so I paraphrased a bit. LOLSomebody tell that kid that he's just another brick in the wall.
*Damn, "you took the words right out of my mouth".....MeatloafI think the words were "Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone"....I like preacher better......
*Well, like I said, I paraphrased. I thought preacher fit the context a bit better.b : )
*Agreed....
*Theo,As others have noted, Kyle's work was published on a fairly "sophisticated" professional site. If the site had been put up by a bunch of 12 year old home schoolees or school schoolees, I think a different standard would apply.And, as I've noted earlier, my main criticism is of those who think that his work represents coherent thought or insight worth adopting as adults.
*on the other hand...it's really only been the past two or three generations that would seriously consider a 12-year-old to be a child. In times past, he would be taking his place in the adult community, and so would have a right to have his views and ideas taken seriously (and quite probably, had them seriously shot down, too!) I'm wrestling with this one, too. I love the idea of a 12-year-old boy who evidently actually enjoys writing and thinking (even if he's still parroting, he's at least articulating for himself!)And I know from experience that he can only get better as he gets older! But I agree, putting his words out there as though they were each little pearls of unassailable wisdom...well that's a mind-set I really have trouble with. My fondest hope for this young man is that one day he'll light out for the territories - hitchhike to San Francisco, sign up on a tramp steamer and see the world. Or go pan for gold in the Yukon. Or whatever the 21st century equivalent of either is... Then come back and write about it.
*A 12 year old boy isn't even pubescent yet. In all past generations, he would have been considered a child. It is only in the past couple of generations that the thoughts and ideas of a 12 year old child have been taken seriously and not considered too childish for adult consideration. Even in the middle ages when the average age of the population was very young, a boy had to grow a beard and his voice had to change before he would be taken seriously. The boy's labor would have been used, but not his ideas. And the boy would have had to accomplish something to prove himself before he would be respected, even if he were a prince. Even aboriginal cultures do not consider a prepubescent child an adult.I don't blame the child. I blame his parents and the web site that sees fit to publish and tout his narrow and immature musings as something adults should take seriously. I also suspect with the puffing up of his ego with this, he will cease to learn and is not being taught critical thinking. 12 is young for critical thinking, but it doesn't look good for his future. It is Brisketbean who touted this little essay as something great. I disagree.Mary
*A 12 year old boy isn't even pubescent yet. Yes, he is. Just barely, but it's happenin'! Confirmation into the Roman Catholic Church - from which moment the communicant becomes an adult member of the community, and is totally responsible for his/her own salvation - happens at or around age 12. Jesus was 12 when he taught in the temple. Bar mitzvah takes place at age 13. Ditto for many other tribal initiation rites. I didn't say a 12-year old's views and ideas had to be adopted by the community - just that he would have the right to express them, and have them considered.
*Given human nature and the facts that Kyle has the link to this thread and knows he is being discussed here, I`d hazard a guess that you have all told him what you think of his efforts.He has probably (sensibly) decided that this mosh pit is just a little too much for him.
*So, it's agreed that the musings of this twelve year old are not worthy of serious adult consideration or discussion, that he should continue to practice his critical writing under competent adult tutelage, that he should broaden his outlook and education so as not to be perceived as parroting the leanings of his current educators, that he should be outside in the fresh air learning to skateboard and that he should be listening to really loud, not so contemporary music.He should read and heed all these recommendations and treat them as gospel because some cyber adults said so.Riiiiiiiight!Hey! What about his self-esteem? I hear a shot or two to the old ego can produce some pretty scary results.
*It goes both ways. If the kid thinks what we say or anyone else ways on the Web is gospel, he's got another set of problems to deal with.
*Oh, Ralph. We're a dozen different people with a dozen different opinions in a stinkin Tavern. Why should anyone get their shorts in a knot over that? It's not like we're going over to Kyle's site(s) to deliver the collective liberal perspective to him. Half of us or more ain't even liberal. If Kyle's over here, it's be/c BB brought him here, which comes back to the real problem. BB likes to drop trashy commentary here and then vilify those who point out that it stinks.
*Ralph,Except for the loud music, that sounds like a pretty reasonable thing the kid or any kid should learn as he or she transits across adolescence to adulthood. A fairly broad based ciriculum even including exercise.Mary
*
See first post, here is a kid that I can agree with.