Re: Liberali u ludilu: zabranili bi roditeljima čitanje djeci

by prckov 15/5/2017, 15:20

Tim Blair, The Daily TelegraphMay 4, 2015 10:30pm
THE ABC has questioned whether parents should read to their children before bedtime, claiming it could give your kids an “unfair advantage” over less fortunate children.
“Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?” asks a story on the ABC’s website.
“Should parents snuggling up for one last story before lights out be even a little concerned about the advantage they might be conferring?”
The story was followed by a broadcast on the ABC’s Radio National that also tackled the apparently divisive issue of bedtime reading.
“Evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,” British academic Adam Swift told ABC presenter Joe Gelonesi.
Gelonesi responded online: “This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion that perhaps — in the interests of levelling the playing field — bedtime stories should also be restricted.”

leftardi opet u elementu

by Regoč 15/5/2017, 15:22

prckov wrote:“Evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,” British academic Adam Swift told ABC presenter Joe Gelonesi.

Dakle, štedite lovu, ne šaljite djecu u privatne škole, čitajte im prije spavanja.

by Guest 15/5/2017, 15:29

bilo bi lako kad bi razlika stvarno bila zbog čitanja bajki prije spavanja

onda bi se razlike mogle jednostavno ispraviti

no čitanje nema veze s time, niti djeca postaju pametnija ako im se pušta Mozart

biološke razlike se ne mogu ukloniti učenjem, nema nade

by marcellus 15/5/2017, 15:36

stara vijest pisao sam o tome

ne postoji ništa što liberali ne bi zabranili ili cenzurirali

by Guest 15/5/2017, 15:41

marcellus wrote:ne postoji ništa što liberali ne bi zabranili ili cenzurirali

nije to kontroverzno, ono što je zapravo problematično je što oni zbilja vjeruju da razlike postoje zbog čitanja bajki djeci, a ignoriraju biologiju i utjecaj gena

by RayMabus 15/5/2017, 15:41

Meni su liberali danas cenzurirali temu o feministkinjama.

lol!

by prckov 15/5/2017, 15:52

glas uhljeba wrote:bilo bi lako kad bi razlika stvarno bila zbog čitanja bajki prije spavanja

onda bi se razlike mogle jednostavno ispraviti

no čitanje nema veze s time, niti djeca postaju pametnija ako im se pušta Mozart

biološke razlike se ne mogu ukloniti učenjem, nema nade

na stranu to
stvar je u tome ( da je recimo stvarno citanje razlog zasto su neki uspjesniji) kako bi to leftard rjesavo
kako neko pri zdravoj pameti moze doc na takvu ideju
nevjerojatno

by prckov 15/5/2017, 16:02

glas uhljeba wrote:
marcellus wrote:ne postoji ništa što liberali ne bi zabranili ili cenzurirali

nije to kontroverzno, ono što je zapravo problematično je što oni zbilja vjeruju da razlike postoje zbog čitanja bajki djeci, a ignoriraju biologiju i utjecaj gena

pa oni vjeruju u preko 70 rodova
gender fluid je svaki dan drugi rod
sta ocekujes od takvih

by Regoč 15/5/2017, 16:12

Ma budaletine. Da je istina, zašto nisu ni razmislili o tom da potaknu sve roditelje na čitanje djeci??

by Kermit 15/5/2017, 16:25

Regoč wrote:
asilovski wrote:
Regoč wrote:
Aso, opet pišeš gluposti. Ne dovodi se u pitanje čitanje kao takvo, već "nepoštene prednosti" koje stječu djeca kojoj se čita, nasuprot djece kojoj se ne čita. Slažem se da je to prednost (vidim to svakodnevno), ali krivnja nije na roditeljih koji čitaju, već na onih koji ne čitaju. Stoga, ne radi se o "nepoštenoj prednosti", već o roditeljskoj neodgovornosti, ako gledamo sa stajališta obrazovnih postignućah, ali možemo to gledati i s motrišta slobode izbora za odgoj i obrazovanje djece jer njeki žele da im djeca imaju manje sposobnosti i znanja.

Kao potkrjepa da Aso opet manipulira naslovi, evo navodak.

THE ABC has questioned whether parents should read to their children before bedtime, claiming it could give your kids an “unfair advantage” over less fortunate children.
Ne znam regi ne rad i uhljebljivanje negativno utječu na tvoju elementarnu logiku i zaključivanje:

"Gelonesi responded online: “This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion that perhaps — in the interests of levelling the playing field — ~~bedtime stories should also be restricted~~.”"
Ograničene, ne zabranjene. Mene više brine što je na pitanje "ne bi li smo izjednačili uvjete na igralištu da potaknemo sve roditelje na čitanje", odgovoril "o tom nismo razmišljali".

Na koji način ćeš ograničiti roditeljsko čitanje knjiga za laku noć ili dobro jutro već zabranama i kontrolom samih roditelja...ovo drugo neću niti komentirati u biti podstiče se ne rad, zanemarivanje, loš odgoj i ograničena zabrana čitanja

by Regoč 15/5/2017, 16:27

asilovski wrote:
Regoč wrote:
asilovski wrote:
Regoč wrote:
Aso, opet pišeš gluposti. Ne dovodi se u pitanje čitanje kao takvo, već "nepoštene prednosti" koje stječu djeca kojoj se čita, nasuprot djece kojoj se ne čita. Slažem se da je to prednost (vidim to svakodnevno), ali krivnja nije na roditeljih koji čitaju, već na onih koji ne čitaju. Stoga, ne radi se o "nepoštenoj prednosti", već o roditeljskoj neodgovornosti, ako gledamo sa stajališta obrazovnih postignućah, ali možemo to gledati i s motrišta slobode izbora za odgoj i obrazovanje djece jer njeki žele da im djeca imaju manje sposobnosti i znanja.

Kao potkrjepa da Aso opet manipulira naslovi, evo navodak.

THE ABC has questioned whether parents should read to their children before bedtime, claiming it could give your kids an “unfair advantage” over less fortunate children.
Ne znam regi ne rad i uhljebljivanje negativno utječu na tvoju elementarnu logiku i zaključivanje:

"Gelonesi responded online: “This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion that perhaps — in the interests of levelling the playing field — ~~bedtime stories should also be restricted~~.”"
Ograničene, ne zabranjene. Mene više brine što je na pitanje "ne bi li smo izjednačili uvjete na igralištu da potaknemo sve roditelje na čitanje", odgovoril "o tom nismo razmišljali".
Na koji način ćeš ograničiti roditeljsko čitanje knjiga za laku noć ili dobro jutro već zabranama i kontrolom samih roditelja...ovo drugo neću niti komentirati u biti podstiče se ne rad, zanemarivanje, loš odgoj i ograničena zabrana čitanja

Jel ti to mene izravno pitaš ili onako općenito? Nisam za zabranu čitanja djeci. Ako misliš na ovo s Abenom, zafrkavamo se. Barem ja, on je možda ozbiljan, nikad ne znaš.

by Kermit 15/5/2017, 16:28

glas uhljeba wrote:
marcellus wrote:ne postoji ništa što liberali ne bi zabranili ili cenzurirali

nije to kontroverzno, ono što je zapravo problematično je što oni zbilja vjeruju da razlike postoje zbog čitanja bajki djeci, a ignoriraju biologiju i utjecaj gena

Gluposti ukoliko se ne radi sa djetetom, odnosno kasnije mladom osobom, ne usađuje ljubav prema radu, čitanju, navike, kultura, etika i dr. ona najčešće postane propalice i šljam unatoč svom bogatstvu gena, stoga ne deda nisu u upravu

by Guest 15/5/2017, 16:45

RUSH: Exactly. I know exactly what you’re talking about. This is when people in the community came together to help people who were disadvantaged or things weren’t working out. It was to help them do better, not to make everybody else join them in mediocrity. Exactly right. Folks, could we also assume that if you feed your child well, you are giving your child an unfair advantage? And if you are feeding your child well and others can’t, should you be forced to eat a Michelle Obama-designed school lunch in order to make everybody feel equal in eating the same rotgut? Hmm?
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: So I wanted to find out who is this clown, this sociologist that is encouraging people in the UK to accept the idea that families reading to their children at bedtime is unfair. Who is this guy? Adam Swift is who is quoted in these stories. He’s “a British political philosopher and sociologist who specialises in debates surrounding liberal egalitarianism. …
“He has since been director of the Oxford Centre for the Study of Social Justice, and has held visiting positions at Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Australian National University, and the University of Wisconsin at Madison. He is currently working on developing a liberal egalitarian theory of the family…” That’s who’s pushing this. One wacko. One lunatic.
One extreme leftist who is obsessed with this perverted definition of fairness and equality, and who is determining that parents who can read to their kids at night with giving them an unfair advantage. And, of course, all this is rooted in the idea that nobody should be any different. We should all be the same. We should all turn out the same. But of course we’re not all the same. Every damn one of us is unique! We are not like anybody else, by design and, by definition.
We all have different talents, characteristics, abilities, albatrosses, liabilities, differing levels of ambition. We have different degrees of health, genetic code. Some of us have a good one, some of us have some problems. Nobody’s the same. And these people are obsessed, nevertheless, with enforcing uniformity on everyone, under this misguided notion of fairness and equality. It’s a bastardization of the word and definition of equality and fairness as well.
Here’s Elaine in Sheldon, Illinois, as we head back to the phones. I’m glad you waited, Elaine. Great to have you with us. Hello.
CALLER: What an honor, Rush. I just got so impassioned when you were talking about that report. We have 13 children. We have read to all of them. Now we read to the grandchildren. We have five married, one in college, seven still at home. It crosses all socioeconomic backgrounds. A mother doesn’t even have to know how to read to open a book with pictures and point at the pictures and read to a toddler by pictures, which is what a toddler would want anyway. And, yes, it does bond the parents with the kids, but it just boiled my blood. I pulled the car over, parked it, and thought, “I gotta call him, because it’s just so ludicrous.” If this man claims to be educated, he’s an educated fool. And I don’t use the word “fool” so that was kind of harsh. But that doesn’t even make common sense.
RUSH: Of course not.
CALLER: Everything that you’ve said about this report is right on. It’s ridiculous.
RUSH: Except one thing: It’s real, and you’d better believe it, because this guy’s dead serious, and he is an accredited Ivy League-level academician. He is considered to be among the most qualified and brilliant and scholarly in this study. As such… You mark my words, the trail here. What’s gonna happen is that this will be picked up in the United States somehow, some way at NPR or some related-type agency. Then it’ll drift over to some Democrat politician in the right community who will go public with the idea.
Much like Biden stole from Neil Kinnock’s speeches and so forth.
He’ll have some sort of… Maybe not even theft, just a sharing of the idea, and it’ll be rooted around election time, and it’ll be aimed at whoever comes up with the idea, claiming to have all of this love and compassion for the poor and we’re looking out for the poor, and it’s not fair you don’t have the same advantages. So I don’t know they’ll come up with the idea to penalize parents here who read to their kids, although they’re… Well, it could. It could manifest itself that way. More likely what will happen is… What you just said is that even a parent who can’t read, who is illiterate, could still share a book of pictures with a kid.
CALLER: Yes.
RUSH: What a typical liberal would say in response to that is, “Well, that’s easy for you to say, but what if that poor mother — because of the unfairness and the inequities of the American economic system — isn’t even home when her child goes to bed because she’s working her fourth job of the day flipping burgers without health care?”
CALLER: We got public libraries with free books, too.
RUSH: “That’s easy for you to say, but that still means that the parents who have a good job or two good jobs and can read to their kids at night, therefore have the economic ability and the freedom and the time to do it, whereas this poor mother that you’re describing can’t.” That will be what they say. It’s not that she could and doesn’t. It’ll be that she can’t because she’s too set upon, put upon by the unfairness in our society anyway. She’s probably not at home! She’s at work, or she has some sort of social problem that she has and so forth. Somebody’s gonna pick this up and run with it for the express purpose of using it as a campaign weapon to establish whoever uses it as committed to fairness, committed to equality.

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/05/05/liberals_reading_to_your_kids_gives_them_an_unfair_advantage/

by Regoč 15/5/2017, 16:48

Ajde Gnječe i od tebe nešto, a da nije protiv ustašah. I još mudro.

by Guest 15/5/2017, 16:56

asilovski wrote:
glas uhljeba wrote:
marcellus wrote:ne postoji ništa što liberali ne bi zabranili ili cenzurirali

nije to kontroverzno, ono što je zapravo problematično je što oni zbilja vjeruju da razlike postoje zbog čitanja bajki djeci, a ignoriraju biologiju i utjecaj gena
Gluposti ukoliko se ne radi sa djetetom, odnosno kasnije mladom osobom, ne usađuje ljubav prema radu, čitanju, navike, kultura, etika i dr. ona najčešće postane propalice i šljam unatoč svom bogatstvu gena, stoga ne deda nisu u upravu

ne možeš tek tako raditi s djecom pa da sve ispadne kako treba

pitanje je zašto nekima mozak daje dopamin kao nagradu kad konzumiraju informacije, kao što ih daje kao kad konzumiraš čokoladu
možda bi to mogao postići kod djece koja to nemaju uvođenjem neke zamjene, davanjem neke psihoaktivne droge kao nagrade za pročitanu knjigu

oni koji čitaju čine to zato što imaju prirodno neku vrstu ovisnosti o konzumaciji informacija, drugi su pak ovisni o fizičkoj aktivnosti te ih mozak nagrađuje kad se bave sportom, treći o nečemu trećemu...

evolucija je slijepa i glupa, valjda će mo jednog dana moći sami konstruirati savršenog čovjeka koji ima sve sposobnosti i prednosti a ne samo neke

by Guest 15/5/2017, 16:58

Regoč wrote:Ajde Gnječe i od tebe nešto, a da nije protiv ustašah. I još mudro.

još uvijek imam zdrav razum, zdravo rasuđivanje i raspoznati što je dobro a što je zlo i protiv sam svih koji zastrane u raznorazna ludila i ta svoja ludila pokušavaju nametnuti društvu.

pročitaj transkript na linku:

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/05/05/liberals_reading_to_your_kids_gives_them_an_unfair_advantage/

RUSH: Let’s go to Australia. Here are these two stories. We’ll get to phone calls in the next segment, I promise. If you’re on hold, be patient. You’re there for a reason. This is the Daily Telegraph first. The second story is actually an Australian news website. This is the Daily Telegraph. “Reading to Children at Bedtime: ABC Questions Value of Time-Honored Practice — The ABC…” The Australian something. The ABC. You know, it doesn’t spell up what that is.
It leaves it up to the reader who is supposed to know what ABC is. This is not the ABC network. It’s Australia. In fact, this may be in the UK. But the point here is some authority, some agency is questioning the value of this. The ABC “has questioned whether parents should read to their children before bedtime, claiming it could give your kids an ‘unfair advantage’ over less fortunate children.”
The next line: “‘Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?’ asks a story on the ABCÂ’s website.” Now, folks, this is exactly what I have warned of, what I have predicted for the 26-plus years that I have been hosting this program. These people have been allowed to go completely over the bend of insanity. This obsession with equality and inequality, as though there ought to be some giant, maybe not invisible but very visible hand mandating equality of outcome, because that’s the only thing that is fair?
And, of course, liberalism creates all of these abject oddities. Liberalism creates single-parent families, for example. Liberalism creates all of these screwball family arrangements and other things that give kids all kinds of problems growing up, and since liberalism creates these things… They won’t admit that, by the way. Since liberalism creates these things, they now have to come up with a way of fixing what is the resulting “inequality” based on their own policies.
The way they do it is to always punish the achievers, people who are successful or at the upper end of anything — income, grade performance, you name it. Those at the top have to be brought down to be on a more equal and level footing with those beneath them. So the sum of this story is that good parents who treat their kids the way good parents do, may not be permitted to do so anymore, because it’s unfair to kids that do not have good parents.
Good parents must now treat their children like bad parents have to treat their kids so that they don’t confer any unfair advantages on their kids. So, like I say, instead of raising up all children by reading to them, we have to go to the very lowest common denominator for all children and penalize those who are doing things right, penalize those who are doing things good. Because it isn’t fair that they can and others can’t.
Now, I’m sure that you’re laughing. Some of you are laughing at this. I used to. We use to do whole sketches, comedy bits, routines, and all kinds of satire about this back in the late eighties and early nineties, on the basis that this was so fringe, that this was so odd, that it was so tiny and unique a part of our entire universe that nobody would ever take this stuff seriously. And, lo and behold, it’s become mainstream in terms of liberal thought.
Now, this particular story is from England. I quickly researched this while I’ve been talking to you, and ABC is their public radio. “‘Evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,’ British academic Adam Swift told ABC presenter Joe Gelonesi. Gelonesi responded online:

“‘This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion that perhaps — in the interests of leveling the playing field — bedtime stories should also be restricted.’ … The ABC,” Australian public radio, “has questioned whether parents should read to their children before bedtime, claiming it could give your kids an ‘unfair advantage’ over less fortunate children.” And then: “‘Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?’ asks a story on the ABC’s website.
“‘Should parents snuggling up for one last story before lights out be even a little concerned about the advantage they might be conferring?'” I’m not making this up! They’re trying to make loving patients feel guilty over the way they treat their kids, over the way they’re able to treat their kids, including reading them one last bedtime story before lights out. “The story was followed by a broadcast on the ABC’s Radio National that also tackled the apparently divisive issue of bedtime reading.

by aben 15/5/2017, 17:49

Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
Nećemo, demokratski ćemo glasovanjem sastaviti popis obvezne lektire sa širega popisa koji će sastaviti stručnjaci.
pa i oni za ke tvrdiš da jesu totalitarni, imali su demokratske izbore.
Samo nacisti, i to jednom, 33., nakon toga više ne.
ča ni bilo izbora u srboslaviji? jo mislin da je.
Čemu Srboslavija? Naravno da je bilo, s jednim kandidatom.

pa povezo sun,
jer si reko da je srboslavija bila totalitarna, pa rekoh da ti povežem te dvi stvori, ne bi li ti ogadi hrvatsku kad pokožen kako je ko srboslavija.

irelevantno je koliko je kandidatov, jednako kako bi ti do izbor roditeljima, tako je postojo izbor u srboslaviji.

by aben 15/5/2017, 17:54

Regoč wrote:
asilovski wrote:
Regoč wrote:
asilovski wrote:
Regoč wrote:
Aso, opet pišeš gluposti. Ne dovodi se u pitanje čitanje kao takvo, već "nepoštene prednosti" koje stječu djeca kojoj se čita, nasuprot djece kojoj se ne čita. Slažem se da je to prednost (vidim to svakodnevno), ali krivnja nije na roditeljih koji čitaju, već na onih koji ne čitaju. Stoga, ne radi se o "nepoštenoj prednosti", već o roditeljskoj neodgovornosti, ako gledamo sa stajališta obrazovnih postignućah, ali možemo to gledati i s motrišta slobode izbora za odgoj i obrazovanje djece jer njeki žele da im djeca imaju manje sposobnosti i znanja.

Kao potkrjepa da Aso opet manipulira naslovi, evo navodak.

THE ABC has questioned whether parents should read to their children before bedtime, claiming it could give your kids an “unfair advantage” over less fortunate children.
Ne znam regi ne rad i uhljebljivanje negativno utječu na tvoju elementarnu logiku i zaključivanje:

"Gelonesi responded online: “This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion that perhaps — in the interests of levelling the playing field — ~~bedtime stories should also be restricted~~.”"
Ograničene, ne zabranjene. Mene više brine što je na pitanje "ne bi li smo izjednačili uvjete na igralištu da potaknemo sve roditelje na čitanje", odgovoril "o tom nismo razmišljali".
Na koji način ćeš ograničiti roditeljsko čitanje knjiga za laku noć ili dobro jutro već zabranama i kontrolom samih roditelja...ovo drugo neću niti komentirati u biti podstiče se ne rad, zanemarivanje, loš odgoj i ograničena zabrana čitanja
Jel ti to mene izravno pitaš ili onako općenito? Nisam za zabranu čitanja djeci. Ako misliš na ovo s Abenom, zafrkavamo se. Barem ja, on je možda ozbiljan, nikad ne znaš.

jo sun ozbiljan ko socijalizam.
zabrana čitanja radi nepoštene početne prednosti, jedun te isti kurikulum u celoj državi i harrison bergeron su sve potpuno iste stvori. jedna je fikcija, jedna je izgledna a jedna je potpuno realna.

by Regoč 15/5/2017, 20:27

aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
pa i oni za ke tvrdiš da jesu totalitarni, imali su demokratske izbore.
Samo nacisti, i to jednom, 33., nakon toga više ne.
ča ni bilo izbora u srboslaviji? jo mislin da je.
Čemu Srboslavija? Naravno da je bilo, s jednim kandidatom.
pa povezo sun,
jer si reko da je srboslavija bila totalitarna, pa rekoh da ti povežem te dvi stvori, ne bi li ti ogadi hrvatsku kad pokožen kako je ko srboslavija.

irelevantno je koliko je kandidatov, jednako kako bi ti do izbor roditeljima, tako je postojo izbor u srboslaviji.

Zašto ne Jugoslavija, to je pitanje glede "Srboslavije". A naravno da nije isto jedan kandidat ili više njih.

by aben 15/5/2017, 20:43

Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
Samo nacisti, i to jednom, 33., nakon toga više ne.
ča ni bilo izbora u srboslaviji? jo mislin da je.
Čemu Srboslavija? Naravno da je bilo, s jednim kandidatom.
pa povezo sun,
jer si reko da je srboslavija bila totalitarna, pa rekoh da ti povežem te dvi stvori, ne bi li ti ogadi hrvatsku kad pokožen kako je ko srboslavija.

irelevantno je koliko je kandidatov, jednako kako bi ti do izbor roditeljima, tako je postojo izbor u srboslaviji.
Zašto ne Jugoslavija, to je pitanje glede "Srboslavije". A naravno da nije isto jedan kandidat ili više njih.

jugoslavija jest srboslavija.

nije isto jedun ili više kandidatov, nego je isto "izbor" na srboslavijskin izborima, i "izbor" između državno odobrene literature za čitanje prije spavanja.

by Regoč 15/5/2017, 20:49

aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
Regoč wrote:
aben wrote:
ča ni bilo izbora u srboslaviji? jo mislin da je.
Čemu Srboslavija? Naravno da je bilo, s jednim kandidatom.
pa povezo sun,
jer si reko da je srboslavija bila totalitarna, pa rekoh da ti povežem te dvi stvori, ne bi li ti ogadi hrvatsku kad pokožen kako je ko srboslavija.

irelevantno je koliko je kandidatov, jednako kako bi ti do izbor roditeljima, tako je postojo izbor u srboslaviji.
Zašto ne Jugoslavija, to je pitanje glede "Srboslavije". A naravno da nije isto jedan kandidat ili više njih.
jugoslavija jest srboslavija.

nije isto jedun ili više kandidatov, nego je isto "izbor" na srboslavijskin izborima, i "izbor" između državno odobrene literature za čitanje prije spavanja.

Nije isto. Kandidat je bil jedan, a literatura bira se sa širega popisa, nješto može i odbaciti se.

by Sponsored content