Connect with us

Education

Malthusian humanism and death education, Part I

Published

on

“We ought to be trembling about the fact that the schools which have failed to teach academics are now presuming to teach matters of life and death.”

– Dr. William Coulson

“…I’ve sort of built my career in helping people try to die better,” explained California ICU physician Jessica Zitter during an NPR interview with host Michel Martin on February 25th of this year (NPR.org).  “I’ve also realized that this [death] is no different a taboo.” Recalling a recent visit to a high school classroom, Zitter philosophized the benefits of teaching children about death, emphasizing the possible impacts that the act of changing the attitudes of youngsters could have on society in the future. “And that’s the kind of thing that I think really starts to make change in our culture,” she said (emphasis mine). “I was once accused by a renowned professor of medicine of deceiving my ICU patients…” she wrote in a 2013, New York Times article entitled, They Call Me Dr. Kevorkian. Dr. Zitter’s presence in the classroom is evidence of a seldom-discussed, yet monumental effort to alter the thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors of Americans, specifically in regards to death. Predators always target the young.

Enter death education.

“Since death has been such a taboo topic, open and honest communication is essential. Such communication helps to desensitize students to anxiety-arousing items.”

– Death Educator Nina Rebak Rosenthal

Few times has something set off so many blaring warning bells in my mind as death education.  “No administrator should be surprised to find that his staff is afraid of handling this topic,” stated an article in Phi Delta Kappan (McLure).  Nevertheless, many educators – motivated by altruism and blinded by an unearned level of trust in the knowledge and intentions of the “experts” – willingly follow the leaders while remaining shamefully unaware of the harm that may result from their implementation of faulty, humanist eschatology and practices in their classrooms. I should know – I am a certified teacher.

I can hear the sales pitch now: First comes the generic, yet overreaching opening statement about “experts”: The experts all agree… blah, blah, blah…  Kids need this…  Blah, blah, blah… The opening remarks are usually designed to disarm teachers by appealing to the dutifully enforced, professional hierarchy. This is typically followed by two or three extremely brief arguments which appeal to educators’ rational thinking.  Brevity is key: if you give the teachers too much time to listen, they might start thinking for themselves… Finally, it is time for the kill shot. This is best described as the stress inducing bombardment of teachers with anecdotal language which directly plays upon their emotions and, thus, smothers all inclinations toward independent analysis or hesitation: Parents don’t talk to their kids anymore or teach them about death, and they are at a disadvantage in life. It’s such a tragedy in our society…. Kids will be confused by all of the misconceptions in the world around them… Do you want the kids to learn about it from their friends, or on the street? Or, don’t you think it’s better they learn about it at school? It might help prevent suicide! (Of course, “preventative education” hasn’t actually been successful at preventing much of anything.)It is actually pretty pathetic how easily we are tricked, how easily we are played.

Death education has been creeping into schools since the 1960’s/70’s, after the publication of Dr. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’s “On Death and Dying” (Blumenfeld, Newman, 2014).  Kübler-Ross was the charismatic leader of a “New Age” death cult, spreading the message of a joyful acceptance of death. “The womb and the grave have been equated in mystery religions. … This is precisely the significance of Kübler-Ross’s choice of death and dying as her primary consideration as a charismatic leader” (Omega, 1985-86). Before long, the “progressive” teachers’ unions jumped into bed with the joyful death movement. We now have entire foundations dedicated to death education, such as the Association for Death Education and Counseling. Even Scholastic, Inc. is pushing death ed. Wolves travel in packs.

Thanatology (the study of death and dying) in the classroom can be summed up as the incorporation of death into the various academic areas of study. “Death by its very nature involves science and medicine, social studies and sociology, psychology, history, art, literature, music, insurance, and law,” wrote one death educator in the March 1973, NEA Journal (National Education Association). As death is so easily integrated into any subject, death education thus provides opportunities for classroom discussions on “the moral and ethical issues of abortion and euthanasia…” (emphasis mine).

Death education can take on two formats: didactic (lectures, videos, etc.) and experiential (simulation exercises). Twelfth graders may design their own headstones during art class or visit a funeral home to view a human cadaver as a science exercise on organ donation. After the suicide of a classmate – a “teachable moment” – eleventh graders may compose their own suicide notes. During a health and wellness class, ninth graders may be instructed to close their eyes and enter a deep trance in which they are to return to the moment that a loved one died. Seventh graders may add up the costs involved in planning their own funeral during math class or write their own wills in language arts. The words corpse, morgue, and cadaver may be added to the fifth grade’s spelling list. Third grade children may be asked to compose their own obituaries as a part of their creative writing unit. The kindergarten class may take a field trip to a mortuary or a cemetery while learning about communities. The preschool class may build caskets in the “blocks center” and take turns playing “the dead person” as a part of dramatic play.

“Class assignments were for students to write their own obituaries and suicide notes. They were told to trust their own judgment in choosing to live or die.”

– Jayne Schindler

Incorporating death and dying into curriculum requires teachers to abandon the role of instructor and, instead, assume the role of facilitator, quasi-therapist, and “reflective listener”; a reckless recipe for disaster. The classroom is transformed into a forum for group, pseudo-psychotherapeutic, “conversation circles.” Unfortunately, from these “’death and dying courses’, there are preliminary indications that this kind of education also leads to a greater likelihood of violence against self” (emphasis mine) (DiGirolamo). In fact, numerous educators have long acknowledged the harm that can be inflicted upon a student as a result of studying death in the classroom. There have even been several recorded suicide attempts by students which coincidentally followed periods of exposure to death education, such as in the case of Tara Becker who attended Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado in the 1980’s.

“Death arouses emotions. Some students may get depressed; others may get angry; many will ask questions or make statements that cause concern for the instructor… Students may discuss the fact that they are having nightmares or that the course is making them depressed or feeling morbid…”

– Death Educator Nina Rebak Rosenthal

Psychologist William Coulson, who was one of the innovators of the psychotherapeutic techniques most often used in death education and who can be credited with the overly-psychologizing of America’s schools, has emphatically spoken out against the techniques he once championed. As it turns out, facilitating value-clarification or being a “reflective listener,” also called “nondirective education,” has been found to actually cause harm rather than prevent it, especially in children. Rather than helping young people understand death, our atheistic classrooms, dripping in moral relativism, are causing young people to feel immense confusion and anxiety.  Teaching with ambivalence – failing to providing students with concrete knowledge of or a declarative sense of right and wrong – forces students to create their own set of values and ideas, regardless of how potentially dangerous or destructive those values and ideas may prove to be. As Teddy Roosevelt once said, “To educate a child in mind and not morals is to educate a menace to society.” Yet, in the secular, humanist classrooms of America’s schools that is precisely what is occurring.

Back in 1990, Dr. Coulson was interviewed for an episode of ABC’s 20/20, “Death in the Classroom,” during which host Tom Jerrial asked, “Aren’t kids seeing more of death these days on television and with crack and violence in the streets… Isn’t there a need to educate them younger about death?” “It sounds like one of those things, Tom, that would be a good idea, except apparently it’s just not working out that way,” Coulson explained. “See, these interventions aren’t powerful enough, if you will, to keep the troubled kids out of trouble, but they are powerful enough to draw the untroubled kids into becoming troubled… What makes us think that American education is going to do a good job teaching death education? We ought to be trembling about the fact that the schools which have failed to teach academics are now presuming to teach matters of life and death.”

Yet, the Malthusian humanists who live amongst us – and those who pull the purse strings from abroad – do not have time for reflection or evaluation; not when there is an entire culture that must be changed, a world population that must be decreased, taboos that need normalizing, and generations of children that need desensitizing. Their eyes are always fixed on the prize, the pot of gold at the bottom of the rainbow.

…Which brings us to the next problem of death education.

Enter George Soros, master puppeteer.

(…to be continued)

Citations + Resources:

 

Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Marc

    June 5, 2017 at 7:11 pm

    This is news to me and it’s scary. If it has got this far, God is the only one who can help us. God bless America….. again!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Economy

The 1751 machine that made everything

Published

on

By

The 1751 machine that made everything

A short video on how technological innovation born of economic liberty has changed the world.

History is more than dates, places and battles. In many instances it’s technological advances that change the world for the betterment of all mankind. In this case it’s the story of French inventor Jacques de Vaucanson and his creation in France of the first all metal slide rest lathe, the forerunner to all modern machine tools in 1751.

Lathes had been around for centuries, but lacked the precision with hand held cutting tools. The slide rest of the Vaucanson metal lathe that provided the control to produce metal part of exacting dimensions. The lathe is said to be able to produce every other machine and machine tool. This advancement changed everything.

The producer of the video references a profound chart of World Population GCP and per Capita GCP 1 –2008 AD from data of the late Angus Maddison, similar to this produced by the  Visual Capitalist, we credit them for the chart and commentary:
Image Credit: Visual Capitalist

 

For thousands of years, economic progress was largely linear and linked to population growth. Without machines or technological innovations, one person could only produce so much with their time and resources.

More recently, innovations in technology and energy allowed the “hockey stick” effect to come into play.

The video was produced by Machine Thinking last year.

While some may quibble about which particular machine produced this miracle The larger point is that the machines of the industrial age profoundly changed what people could produce.

As the video noted the average person in 1600 was no better off economically than someone thousands of years earlier. This is what is called the Malthusian trap and for seven thousand years, it was inescapable no matter what we did.

Machine tools such as this changed all of that, one person could produce what had taken many. This surplus could outpace births, allowing the economy to grow at an incredible pace as seen in the chart. All from the genius of the mind undergirded by the Economic liberty of the free-enterprise system. This is why this is vastly superior to the societal slavery of socialism.

Boost This Post

Get this story in front of tens of thousands of patriots who need to see it. For every $30 you donate here, this story will be broadcast to an addition 7000 Americans or more. If you’d prefer to use PayPal, please email me at jdrucker@reagan.com and let me know which post you want boosted after you donate through PayPal.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Education

Congress tries to force schools to make girls compete against biological males

Published

on

Congress tries to force schools to make girls compete against biological males

Every Democrat in the House of Representatives but one were joined by two Republicans to sponsor the Equality Act, an amendment to the Civil Rights Act that would add “sexual orientation and gender identity” as protected characteristics under federal anti-discrimination law. The controversial component of the act is how it would force schools to allow biological males who identify as females to compete in girls’ athletics.

The two Republicans who joined the Democrats were Reps. John Katko of New York and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania. The lone Democrat who didn’t sponsor the bill was Illinois Rep. Dan Lipinski, the only pro-life Democrat left in the House.

234 House Democrats, 2 Republicans Co-Sponsor Bill Forcing Schools to Let Male Athletes Compete on Girls Sports Teams

Opinion

The left loves to talk about “settled science” when it comes to climate change, evolution, and other issues that pertain to politics, culture, and religion. Here’s a taste of science that is actually settled. Males are physically superior to females when it comes to athletic events. They are stronger. They are faster. They are larger.

Let’s not even go into the patently obvious reality that these transgender girls will dominate the sports. It’s continuously well documented; we’ve talked about it ourselves a few times.

Instead, let’s discuss two other important issues: safety and the political ramifications. Is it safe for a biological male who identifies as a girl to wrestle biological girls? How about a biological female who is using hormones to transition to become a male? Texas wrestler Matt Beggs won the state girls’ wrestling championship two years in a row. Watching the video, it’s clear the girls had zero chance of winning, but more importantly they were in more physical danger than they would have been had they been wrestling someone who had not been given male hormones.

The other aspect, and perhaps the only silver lining to all this, is the hope that common sense is still alive and well in America. If the GOP can make this an issue in the 2020 elections, they have an opportunity to highlight the leftist lunacy that’s spreading across the Democratic Party. I find it hard to believe a majority of Americans believe biological males should compete with biological females based on how the males identify.

Then again, this could demonstrate that America really has lost its way. If I’m wrong and a majority really doesn’t see anything wrong with this, then perhaps our fates are already sealed.

Quote

“Very disappointed in and for sponsoring the Equality Act. Have you ever seen a biological male wrestle a girl? If not, I’ll spoil it for you. The one with male musculature wins every time and it’s not even close. Put science over your feelings, guys.” – JD Rucker

Final Thoughts

The line needs to be drawn immediately. This isn’t just about the unfairness of biological males dominating female sports. It’s about the safety of these young ladies. Identifying as females doesn’t change the reality that they’re bigger, stronger, and faster, period.

This story was updated to demonstrate the proper sex of Matt Beggs.

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Conservative Michael J. Knowles attacked with ‘odorous substance’ during campus speech

Published

on

Conservative Michael J Knowles attacked with odorous substance during campus speech

The ongoing campaign of intimidation and violence against conservatives speaking on college campuses took an ugly turn last night as Daily Wire show host Michael J. Knowles was sprayed with an “odorous substance” made to seem like bleach during a YAF speech at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. He was hit in the face but wasn’t concerned, thinking it was paint or even milk. Later, he realized it was possibly bleach but was told by police it was not.

He was giving a speech titled “Men are Not Women” when the attack took place.

Here is a better angle to see the attacker and subsequent law enforcement take-down:

Here’s what was left from the water gun used by the attacker:

Michael J Knowles Attacked

Opinion

Where do we begin? This represents an escalation of tactics that seems to be becoming more prevalent over the last couple of years. It wasn’t too long ago when leftists on campus would simply protest. They learned that these protests didn’t get the kind of attention they wanted and did very little to stop conservatives from speaking on campus, so they turned to more aggressive forms of protests that could actually disrupt the speakers.

The assault on Knowles wasn’t the first time physical violence was employed and it won’t be the last. But since it won’t work to actually stop most speakers from appearing, the next stage of escalation could turn deadly. That’s the real fear and why law enforcement is unfortunately required in order to keep the speakers and those in attendance safe from the unhinged progressives.

As I’ve noted before, this isn’t a question of freedom of speech. It’s about freedom of thought. As college progressives attempt to make their campuses “safe” from the ideas that conservatives spread, what they’re really doing is stifling the types of thoughts that could free some student from a life of helplessness, victimhood, and declining personal responsibility. Many if not most conservative speakers invited by organizations like YAF offer viewpoints that these students will not hear in classrooms or in the cafeteria with friends. The concepts being quashed are driven by the philosophy that made America a great nation, the concepts that desperately need to be heard by a generation that is growing increasingly lost in their own servitude to the leftist mindset.

It’s imperative for conservatives to keep speaking, for students to start listening, and for the radical progressives to stop shouting down the ideas that could actually keep this generation from destroying the United States of America.

Quote

“If a masked idiot came at me during a speech he better hope there’s campus police to take him down and not this pissed off preggo mama. has more restraint than I.” – Elisha Krauss

Final Thoughts

The escalation of suppression techniques used against conservative speakers on campus is scary. Before, it was the heckler’s veto. Today, it’s odorous substances. Tomorrow, it could be more deadly. The left can’t win with thoughts so they rely on anger.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report