T
Thorolfr
Guest
I guess you know more about this issue than the authors of the 2010 Swedish study which studied more than 7,600 twins when they concluded:
The Catholic schools use Scholastic Book Fairs that distributes homosexual (starting at preschool) and transgender books (starting at middle school)
- Status
P
Peeps
Guest
There are THOUSANDS of really good books for children of all ages that do not talk about “families.” Why waste time on dreck that will be here today and gone tomorrow?!
The Corduroy series is an example–it’s about a stuffed bear and his adventures. And Dandelion is about a lion–it’s soooo good! All the Winnie the Pooh books.
Many of the books that I have listed, and MANY of the “older” children’s books teach LOVE and RESPECT for all people. The ones I list above do this.
For elementary-school kids, the Danny Dunn books, the Mad Scientist club, the Box Car Kids., the Gone-Away books, the Little House books, Charlotte’s Web, the Logan family books (Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry), etc. etc. , many of the older Caldecott Award winners, the Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, books–dated but very interesting and a great view of life before cell phones and computers (do NOT buy or go anywhere near the odious NEW Nancy Drew books–blech!).
These books open up minds and expose a child to new people, places, and activities, but they do not shovel out the child’s religion and throw it on a trash heap, and they do NOT expose a little one to harmful thoughts and activities that will scar their soul.
For middle-school and high school kids, the wonderful Newbury Award winners (the older ones). EVERY GIRL should read Little Women, Little Men, and Jo’s Boys. EVERY TEENAGER should read Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn (the originals, not the cleaned-up “easy reading” versions). There are so many classics that are great for these older kids–Dickens, Hawthorne, Poe, etc. For those kids who are into D and D and other fantasy, there are the Lovecraft books–absolute American classics (and H.P. Lovecraft was NOT gay, as some have claimed–he was married to a woman and she wrote about their sex life!) And there are plenty of modern-time books that are excellent for teenagers that make them think hard, but do not teach them that their religion is out-of-date.
When I was in middle-school, I loved reading Shakespeare’s plays–so many themes, and timely during the 1960s and early 1970s, when our lives were under the shadow of the Viet Nam war and the Iron Curtain.
THOUSANDS OF GOOD BOOKS FOR KIDS OF ALL AGES! And these books promote literacy, love of reading, peace and love, tolerance, (without bringing up any kind of sexuality), imagination, knowledge of other cultures, a recognition that there is more out there than what we see and hear in our own part of the world.
Don’t waste time on stupid books that were produced by a company rather than a writer. Buy or check out the very best books, both ancient and modern. Read all the books that your children read–my mother used to do that, not to protest the books, but so she could talk them over with me. She loved to read, and in spite of an 8th grade education, read the BEST.
Start today by going to your library and checking out “Frederick.” It’s about a mouse. After you read it, you will dread winter less, and not just winter “weather,” but any winter that comes into your life–deaths, family conflicts, job woes, sickness, poverty.
The Corduroy series is an example–it’s about a stuffed bear and his adventures. And Dandelion is about a lion–it’s soooo good! All the Winnie the Pooh books.
Many of the books that I have listed, and MANY of the “older” children’s books teach LOVE and RESPECT for all people. The ones I list above do this.
For elementary-school kids, the Danny Dunn books, the Mad Scientist club, the Box Car Kids., the Gone-Away books, the Little House books, Charlotte’s Web, the Logan family books (Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry), etc. etc. , many of the older Caldecott Award winners, the Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, books–dated but very interesting and a great view of life before cell phones and computers (do NOT buy or go anywhere near the odious NEW Nancy Drew books–blech!).
These books open up minds and expose a child to new people, places, and activities, but they do not shovel out the child’s religion and throw it on a trash heap, and they do NOT expose a little one to harmful thoughts and activities that will scar their soul.
For middle-school and high school kids, the wonderful Newbury Award winners (the older ones). EVERY GIRL should read Little Women, Little Men, and Jo’s Boys. EVERY TEENAGER should read Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn (the originals, not the cleaned-up “easy reading” versions). There are so many classics that are great for these older kids–Dickens, Hawthorne, Poe, etc. For those kids who are into D and D and other fantasy, there are the Lovecraft books–absolute American classics (and H.P. Lovecraft was NOT gay, as some have claimed–he was married to a woman and she wrote about their sex life!) And there are plenty of modern-time books that are excellent for teenagers that make them think hard, but do not teach them that their religion is out-of-date.
When I was in middle-school, I loved reading Shakespeare’s plays–so many themes, and timely during the 1960s and early 1970s, when our lives were under the shadow of the Viet Nam war and the Iron Curtain.
THOUSANDS OF GOOD BOOKS FOR KIDS OF ALL AGES! And these books promote literacy, love of reading, peace and love, tolerance, (without bringing up any kind of sexuality), imagination, knowledge of other cultures, a recognition that there is more out there than what we see and hear in our own part of the world.
Don’t waste time on stupid books that were produced by a company rather than a writer. Buy or check out the very best books, both ancient and modern. Read all the books that your children read–my mother used to do that, not to protest the books, but so she could talk them over with me. She loved to read, and in spite of an 8th grade education, read the BEST.
Start today by going to your library and checking out “Frederick.” It’s about a mouse. After you read it, you will dread winter less, and not just winter “weather,” but any winter that comes into your life–deaths, family conflicts, job woes, sickness, poverty.
Last edited:
P
pnewton
Guest
I am judgmental??? What I am is skeptical, based on my own experience. The judgmental part has only been directed at Scholastic Book Fair. I am not saying it is justified or unjustified. I am only saying the is what the word “judgmental” actually means.
P
pnewton
Guest
While that is good, they do not seem to have a very broad selection of secular material. It sounds like a good program, I just don’t know if it is a good alternative program.
Last edited:
L
Londoner
Guest
Someone further up the thread who has read the book confirms that the book makes no claim that animals of the same sex are able to reproduce together biologically. Anyway, I managed to lay eyes on the book in question. Here is a direct quotation: “Some children live with their father. Some children have two mothers. Some children are adopted. Some have stepsisters and – brothers.” From the context, I think it is clear that the book is just saying that some children live in a family that comprises two mothers with children. Where it says, “Some children live with their father”, I don’t think there’s any suggestion that a female is not required for reproduction to take place, just that in some families children live only with their father.
Or this: “Some children have two dads.” The illustration is two roosters, one wearing a bow tie, the other wearing a tie, and they are sitting with three chicks. The child reading it will just see two roosters with chicks and think it’s cute and will assume that the two roosters look after the chicks and the chicks call them Dad. I can pretty much guarantee you that the child isn’t going to think, “Ah, so the way that domestic fowl reproduce is that one male places his cloaca over the cloaca of the other male to release his sperm, and then the chick develops inside an egg inside the male and the male lays the egg through his cloaca …”
The book is aimed at 3-year-olds. They won’t understand about sperm or eggs or the mechanics of reproduction. Just possibly they will understand that birds lay eggs and mammals have babies. But they’re not going to be drawing any conclusions about how reproduction takes place. The book is not misleading on a biological level. Likewise, I do not think that children will come away from reading this book thinking that elderly walruses actually wear a scarf and spectacles or that walrus children wear swimming trunks.
Or this: “Some children have two dads.” The illustration is two roosters, one wearing a bow tie, the other wearing a tie, and they are sitting with three chicks. The child reading it will just see two roosters with chicks and think it’s cute and will assume that the two roosters look after the chicks and the chicks call them Dad. I can pretty much guarantee you that the child isn’t going to think, “Ah, so the way that domestic fowl reproduce is that one male places his cloaca over the cloaca of the other male to release his sperm, and then the chick develops inside an egg inside the male and the male lays the egg through his cloaca …”
The book is aimed at 3-year-olds. They won’t understand about sperm or eggs or the mechanics of reproduction. Just possibly they will understand that birds lay eggs and mammals have babies. But they’re not going to be drawing any conclusions about how reproduction takes place. The book is not misleading on a biological level. Likewise, I do not think that children will come away from reading this book thinking that elderly walruses actually wear a scarf and spectacles or that walrus children wear swimming trunks.
B
Bithynian
Guest
That’s the real blasphemy in this book: animals wearing clothes. Children will begin to doubt the inerrancy of Scriptures when they notice that God did not create every creeping and flying thing with their own line of fashionable attire.
S
SadPotato
Guest
J
jrgmercado
Guest
My daughter just turned 5…she is well aware were babies come from since she was 3 thanks to her baby brother…now she doesn’t HOW it happened but she’s knows that her brother came from her mommy’s tummy.
C
CilladeRoma
Guest
That is exactly why I learned, my baby sister.
I had this wonderful book growing up that was written for children that explained, in a very age-appropriate way, how babies were made.
I just don’t understand why anyone would think that is weird. Isn’t that the time to start having these talks with your kids, when new ones are coming?
I had this wonderful book growing up that was written for children that explained, in a very age-appropriate way, how babies were made.
I just don’t understand why anyone would think that is weird. Isn’t that the time to start having these talks with your kids, when new ones are coming?
J
jrgmercado
Guest
In our family, I didn’t/won’t need a book to explain the different types of family because we have each type represented.
C
CilladeRoma
Guest
Like most people who live in the real world do.
T
tifischer
Guest
Christian Book Fair aka Catholic Book For provides live book fairs and 100% of the profit goes to the school as a fundraiser.
T
tifischer
Guest
Romans 12:2 says, “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect."*
T
tifischer
Guest
That book is not in the book fair…there are different books that tech children other concepts though…
P
pnewton
Guest
I tried searching there for some of the Newberry winners I know and couldn’t find any, nor could I find any of the best titles for older kids that I know, save Tolkien. I am not saying such fairs are not good, but they are not very inclusive of the best literature for those age groups. Surely there must be a way to exclude that which is objectionable without excluding everything secular.
P
pnewton
Guest
After looking over the current circulars, and my own experience, I will have to decline that this is an issue. It is easy enough to filter out an objectionable book, if one pops up, for a parent. In a Catholic school setting, information can even be given to parents on such books. There simply is too much good stuff missing from the other two sites here, as good as those programs might be, I think ditching SBF might throw out the baby with the bath water. I still shop at Amazon, Barnes & Nobles, Target, etc., despite their lack of a singular religious focus. I do not see the major difference.
I see the purpose of caution, but I am not alarmed in the least by Catholic schools still using SBF.
I see the purpose of caution, but I am not alarmed in the least by Catholic schools still using SBF.
P
pnewton
Guest
I do not think SBF fits the moral burden of supporting any sin. Purchasing such books might. Shopping at a place that carries those books is not cooperation with evil. Saying you are Catholic also means not trying to lay any moral burden on your fellow Catholics outside that which the Church has taught, and what the precepts of the Church demand. That was what the Pharisees did in their time. I am not saying anyone is a Pharisee. I am only saying that when we start trying to impose such a moral stance on others, then there is that risk. The Catechism is an inch and a half thick. We do not need to add to it.
Last edited:
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
In a Catholic school it only makes sense to make restrictions, and it’s not like the action of not having the bookst is riddled with some horrendous consequence.
Last edited:
S
sainteriksrose
Guest
A wonderful idea…
Along with the books offeted here and (i think it is) Pauline Press.
Raymond Arroyo has a series out for children as well!
Along with the books offeted here and (i think it is) Pauline Press.
Raymond Arroyo has a series out for children as well!
C
CatholicELATeacher
Guest
Since there is no communion of persons–no nuptial relationship in homosexual coupling–the only “family” that can accrue in such a relationship is purely secular in definition. From the standpoint of Christian anthropology there is no “parenting” and no “family” resulting from such a relationship.
Last edited:
- Status