Re: for H.S. band directors


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Joe Baker (long) on January 15, 2003 at 14:36:16:

In Reply to: for H.S. band directors posted by anti - N.E.A. on January 14, 2003 at 20:23:45:

Wow, the responses to this have been really interesting. The original poster just threw it out there without comment, and was not only assumed to agree with the article, but also assumed to be trying to get people to leave the NEA. I kind of thought that, if he or she DID agree with it, the point might have been to mobilize people to take a role in defining what the organization that claims to represent them is saying. For example, the church denomination with which I am affiliated takes certain positions with which I disagree. Because our hierarchy is elected, and because the denomination does the most important things VERY right (in my opinion), I do not intend to change denominations, but I DO have a desire to influence, in my miniscule way (a voice crying in the wilderness, so to speak), the policies of my denomination. On the other hand, I surrendered my PTA card several years ago when I learned that the PTA not only lobbied against home schools, but against school vouchers! Despite the considerable good the PTA does, I cannot allow myself to be counted among those who represent these views.

So back to the story at hand. I've heard this story reported from a variety of very different sources, and am rather inclined to believe it is essentially true. If so, then teachers who disagree with this stance need to decide if this is something that represents them personally, or if they are at least willing to endorse (consider carefully what that word means) in order to achieve other goals. If so, stay in, and try to affect things from within. If not (and if your state allows you the freedom to decide), then get out.

Bottom line, I haven't seen anyone here advocate outlawing the NEA, and those who are opposed to it are as entitled to that opinion as those who favor it are entitled to theirs. The real question is how the labor needs of educators are met by the national organization taking ANY stance on how 9/11 should be spun. I expect most folks think that, while they are within their rights, it is inappropriate to do so -- particularly when the stance taken is opposed to the beliefs of the majority of their parents.

Speaking as one of the parents, BTW, I don't know exactly WHERE the anti-American and socialist crap is coming from, local, state or national. I think it is logical to believe it is the national organization because (a) it's happening all over the country, (b) socialism is a very union-friendly doctrine (which makes teaching socialism to kids even more grotesque, as it is self-serving to do so), and (c) we keep hearing stories like this one from a variety of sources, many of which are pretty reliable. Wherever it's coming from, it IS getting force-fed to my kids, and I'm fed up with it. I can fully understand why someone who is convinced that they've found the source would lash out against it.

Joe Baker, who thinks labor unions -- especially those who are shaping young minds --should represent the safety and welfare of their members, and stay out of the indoctrination business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PS I read yesterday that the NEA gets $700 per month from Washington D.C. teachers. Is this the same everywhere? Isn't there REALLY a better way to fund the benefits teachers seek? Oh well, each according to the dictates of his own conscience.


Follow Ups: