When is 20% > 80%?

Mamabear, enjoy the Harvest Festival! You've earned it with your reasonable, respectful explanations for why the SB community is choosing to forgo more candy in favor of an inclusive feast.

Rivoli said:
Mamabear, enjoy the Harvest Festival! You've earned it with your reasonable, respectful explanations for why the SB community is choosing to forgo more candy in favor of an inclusive feast.

+10!

Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

shanabasha said:
Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

Um...not sure where you've been but we've been discussing it literally for years (I remember the first time being 5 years ago) at multiple PTA meetings.

mamabear said:

shanabasha said:
Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

Um...not sure where you've been but we've been discussing it literally for years (I remember the first time being 5 years ago) at multiple PTA meetings.

Okay, mamabear I am not trying to undermine any of your earlier arguments. I think you presented very thoughtful perspective about the issue and I agree with a lot of your points. But I have a question.

You mentioned that it's been discussed at multiple PTA meetings. Does that mean the PTA membership was invited to take a vote as to whether to support the decision to not have school-wide Halloween celebration? Or are you comfortable with the co-presidents of the PTA supporting the principal's decision without the explicit backing of the membership of the Seth Boyden PTA?

I understand such a vote would not establish school policy, but it would define that the PTA supported the decision, which is implied by the signatures of the two co-presidents.

mamabear said:

shanabasha said:
Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

Um...not sure where you've been but we've been discussing it literally for years (I remember the first time being 5 years ago) at multiple PTA meetings.

I am only aware of one discussion at a PTA meeting in the last two years. I don't believe there was a puplic agenda showing that it would be discussed. I don't recall anyone being at that meeting that doesn't allow their child to participate because they do not celebrate Halloween. I do recall there were several parents there against not having the parade. After last year's Halloween I don't think there were any further open discussions about it. At the end of the day there was no general consensus made amongst the SB community as a whole.

ETA: I'm not saying that the choice was necessarily wrong. It just has been bothering me that for a school that prides itself on inclusiveness, a lot of decisions are made that really don't include the entire community. That's not the fault of those making the decisions. Unfortunately a big part of the SB community does not get involved in the school other than their child's direct education and therefore, their needs get spoken for without really knowing how they feel. I do give credit though to the leadership for always trying to take into account what they think are the concerns of the whole community. I just think too many assumptions get made that way.

When I chose to not attend the physics field trip in high school I had to sit in the library with the other students who had also opted out. Such exclusionary practices should be banned, no more physics field trips should be allowed.

ctrzaska said:

DaveSchmidt said:

ctrzaska said:
OK, so three of them.

If the principal and parent reps at my child's school were in agreement on an issue as tertiary as this one, the mat would have to come to me.

Never been a fan of oligarchies, to be honest.

You can't make decisions by consensus at this level - even though I disagree with this decision.

shanabasha said:

mamabear said:

shanabasha said:
Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

Um...not sure where you've been but we've been discussing it literally for years (I remember the first time being 5 years ago) at multiple PTA meetings.

I am only aware of one discussion at a PTA meeting in the last two years. I don't believe there was a puplic agenda showing that it would be discussed. I don't recall anyone being at that meeting that doesn't allow their child to participate because they do not celebrate Halloween. I do recall there were several parents there against not having the parade. After last year's Halloween I don't think there were any further open discussions about it. At the end of the day there was no general consensus made amongst the SB community as a whole.

I'm not sure which year it was, because honestly we do discuss for like an hour in both the October and then usually the November meetings every year, but I specifically remember one year we had an had like an hour debate about it, and while the were people who definitely for the parade there were more who agreed on not having it. There were several people at that meeting who did not participate in Halloween (I remember because of one woman who just kept saying "it's creepy"). As for process, Specifically the PTA pres, PTA VP, head of Fundraising, secretary and treasurer (exec board) develop the calendar along with administration which is then approved by the full board. (Lots of other positions,,,) None of which is done in a vacuum, like I said, we've been discussing it for years.

Other logistical things we had to consider was simply how to handle kids who do not participate. It's not like we have 5-10 students who don't participate, but rather over 100. They no longer fit in the library. Also, someone needs to supervise the kids which has meant scrambling to assign 6-7 staff members to it. Last year, we did do something where we planned a variety of activities for the kids to do (chess, gym, garden, art,etc) and while it was a success it was hard to get both teachers and volunteers to run it.

Hope this makes sense..shanabasha,

spontaneous said:
When I chose to not attend the physics field trip in high school I had to sit in the library with the other students who had also opted out. Such exclusionary practices should be banned, no more physics field trips should be allowed.

I agree. You felt so distraught that you cried in the library the whole time.

Wait, no, you didn't. Um, do you really not see how...

...eh, nevermind. This example is so obviously opposite of the topic at hand, that you're not even trying.

spontaneous said:
When I chose to not attend the physics field trip in high school I had to sit in the library with the other students who had also opted out. Such exclusionary practices should be banned, no more physics field trips should be allowed.

Well, when we plan optional field trips, we'd like to think we are choosing ones in which we know everyone can participate in. To specifically plan a field trip in which you know 20% won't participate probably isn't the best use of resources and money.

sprout said:

spontaneous said:
When I chose to not attend the physics field trip in high school I had to sit in the library with the other students who had also opted out. Such exclusionary practices should be banned, no more physics field trips should be allowed.

I agree. You felt so distraught that you cried in the library the whole time.
Wait, no, you didn't. Um, do you really not see how...
...eh, nevermind. This example is so obviously opposite of the topic at hand, that you're not even trying.

My comment was in response to a comment a few pages back about how kids sitting in the library was exclusionary and punishment, or words to that effect. I felt that was a stupid argument.

mamabear said:

shanabasha said:

mamabear said:

shanabasha said:
Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

Um...not sure where you've been but we've been discussing it literally for years (I remember the first time being 5 years ago) at multiple PTA meetings.

I am only aware of one discussion at a PTA meeting in the last two years. I don't believe there was a puplic agenda showing that it would be discussed. I don't recall anyone being at that meeting that doesn't allow their child to participate because they do not celebrate Halloween. I do recall there were several parents there against not having the parade. After last year's Halloween I don't think there were any further open discussions about it. At the end of the day there was no general consensus made amongst the SB community as a whole.

I'm not sure which year it was, because honestly we do discuss for like an hour in both the October and then usually the November meetings every year, but I specifically remember one year we had an had like an hour debate about it, and while the were people who definitely for the parade there were more who agreed on not having it. There were several people at that meeting who did not participate in Halloween (I remember because of one woman who just kept saying "it's creepy"). As for process, Specifically the PTA pres, PTA VP, head of Fundraising, secretary and treasurer (exec board) develop the calendar along with administration which is then approved by the full board. (Lots of other positions,,,) None of which is done in a vacuum, like I said, we've been discussing it for years.
Other logistical things we had to consider was simply how to handle kids who do not participate. It's not like we have 5-10 students who don't participate, but rather over 100. They no longer fit in the library. Also, someone needs to supervise the kids which has meant scrambling to assign 6-7 staff members to it. Last year, we did do something where we planned a variety of activities for the kids to do (chess, gym, garden, art,etc) and while it was a success it was hard to get both teachers and volunteers to run it.
Hope this makes sense..shanabasha,

It does and I do get it. I added to my last post and that second part is my biggest issue but that goes way beyond the Halloween discussion.

One of the reasons why I'm happy my boys are no longer in elementary school. I see not much has changed when it comes to Halloween. We had the parades and they were a hoot but then it became cuckoo crazy because a small amount of parents, and I do mean small, started complaining about, as mentioned before, the "devil" aspect and how many children were "afraid" of some of the masks. Okay. So the following year we decided costumes, but no masks. Problem fixed? Not so fast. Then the problem became some sort of religious exclusion and how their child would be "left out" because they were not allowed to participate. WTF? I wholeheartedly agree with the OP's subject line. This is getting crazier by the year with still no resolve other than to ban it?

As it is, chorus kids can't sing traditional holiday songs because of the "religious" aspect. Now there's no Halloween fun at some schools. What happened to separation of Church and State?

Woot said:

ctrzaska said:

DaveSchmidt said:

ctrzaska said:
OK, so three of them.

If the principal and parent reps at my child's school were in agreement on an issue as tertiary as this one, the mat would have to come to me.

Never been a fan of oligarchies, to be honest.

You can't make decisions by consensus at this level - even though I disagree with this decision.

Exactly. And that's one of the more troubling aspects of this issue.

If my religion tells me that it is immoral for girls and boys to be taught in the same room together, I am free to pull my child from school and teach them at home or at a religious school that holds the same view as I do. I am not free to force the public school to bend to my view.

If my religion tells me that eating meat of any kind is a sin I am free to send my child to school with a meat free lunch, or to tell him to always choose the meat free offering at school. I am not free to force the school to serve only vegetarian meals to meet my religious standards.

If my religion tells me that evolution is a myth and that the world was created six thousand years ago, I am free to tell my children as much and am also free to tell them that their science teacher is a blasphemer and will go to hell. I am not free to force the school to drop science classes and teach creationism.

Kim Davis has no right to force her religious beliefs on others, and neither do parents have the right to force their religious views on the school.

What I find really sad is the people who also argue that fun events have no place in a school. Education is more than just slaving over books and memorizing time tables all day long.

Personally, when my kids got to elementary school here in the late 1990s, I was pretty surprised at how much Halloween celebration happened there and it has only increased in the years since then. When I was growing up, Halloween was 'trick or treat' and maybe an evening party somewhere. I don't think we were even allowed to wear/bring costumes to school, although there were probably Halloween-themed art class activities and bulletin boards. Given all the town-wide parade/celebrations PLUS trick or treat, why is it SO important to lose instructional time for yet another celebration during school hours anyway? (And, doubly so if there is a very significant number of students who do not participate.)

Rivoli said:
Mamabear, enjoy the Harvest Festival! You've earned it with your reasonable, respectful explanations for why the SB community is choosing to forgo more candy in favor of an inclusive feast.

I wasn't (totally) serious about my earlier Golden Bough reference, though this gave me quite the chuckle when I pondered the delicious irony presented by a bunch of devout Catholics up in arms over such a deeply pagan ritual, and leaving their kids home. Stick with the three Rs, kids... the rest of it is all offensive fluff.

spontaneous said:
If my religion tells me that it is immoral for girls and boys to be taught in the same room together, I am free to pull my child from school and teach them at home or at a religious school that holds the same view as I do. I am not free to force the public school to bend to my view.
If my religion tells me that eating meat of any kind is a sin I am free to send my child to school with a meat free lunch, or to tell him to always choose the meat free offering at school. I am not free to force the school to serve only vegetarian meals to meet my religious standards.
If my religion tells me that evolution is a myth and that the world was created six thousand years ago, I am free to tell my children as much and am also free to tell them that their science teacher is a blasphemer and will go to hell. I am not free to force the school to drop science classes and teach creationism.
Kim Davis has no right to force her religious beliefs on others, and neither do parents have the right to force their religious views on the school.
What I find really sad is the people who also argue that fun events have no place in a school. Education is more than just slaving over books and memorizing time tables all day long.

As was explained earlier, it is NOT the parents in question who are forcing (or apparently even requesting) this. It was a decision by the PTA and administration based on dealing with the event in question over a number of years. And I would be willing to bet that the vast majority (if not all) of those who were actually making the decision DO celebrate Halloween in their families.

spontaneous said:
If my religion tells me that it is immoral for girls and boys to be taught in the same room together, I am free to pull my child from school and teach them at home or at a religious school that holds the same view as I do. I am not free to force the public school to bend to my view.
If my religion tells me that eating meat of any kind is a sin I am free to send my child to school with a meat free lunch, or to tell him to always choose the meat free offering at school. I am not free to force the school to serve only vegetarian meals to meet my religious standards.
If my religion tells me that evolution is a myth and that the world was created six thousand years ago, I am free to tell my children as much and am also free to tell them that their science teacher is a blasphemer and will go to hell. I am not free to force the school to drop science classes and teach creationism.
Kim Davis has no right to force her religious beliefs on others, and neither do parents have the right to force their religious views on the school.
What I find really sad is the people who also argue that fun events have no place in a school. Education is more than just slaving over books and memorizing time tables all day long.

Did you not read any of the posts in this thread? It has nothing to do with anyone forcing religious choices on anyone. But once again, in a world where resources are limited and choices are infinite, the people who do the events decided to focus are resources on events that benefit ALL of students. When given the chance to pick our activities we choose the ones that ALL our students can participate in.

shanabasha said:
Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

As evidenced by this board you would not reach consensus. Plus, this topic is not about learning and doesn't warrant a large forum. The Principal and PTA made a decision after careful consideration.

I did read the thread. I read the multiple references to Jejovah's Witnesses being offended by Halloween and the school in question having a large number of families who follow that religion. This non-religiousevent is being dropped to make them comfortable. That isn't right.

That's not why it's being dropped.

That this thread is garnering such passionate responses is astounding to me.

spontaneous said:
I did read the thread. I read the multiple references to Jejovah's Witnesses being offended by Halloween and the school in question having a large number of families who follow that religion. This non-religiousevent is being dropped to make them comfortable. That isn't right.

Did I miss something? I didn't read anything about JW's. Could you provide more info about this?

kibbegirl said:

spontaneous said:
I did read the thread. I read the multiple references to Jejovah's Witnesses being offended by Halloween and the school in question having a large number of families who follow that religion. This non-religiousevent is being dropped to make them comfortable. That isn't right.

Did I miss something? I didn't read anything about JW's. Could you provide more info about this?

I think the posters actually called them "Witnesses" and not Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm not going back through four pages of posts to find them, but there were references.

Consideration of what exactly? I'd like to hear one cogent argument about why Halloween celebrations constitute devil worship. All holidays with ancient Christian or pagan roots have Eves: Christmas Eve, New Years Eve, and the newly minted high school reunion drinking celebration called Thanksgiving Eve. The point is that the Eves have all become celebratory over the centuries and All Hallows' Eve is just one of those. If a few families don't view a particular holiday as secular, then fine, don't participate. But I want to hear someone actually articulate the devil/occult theory and see how many liberal MOL posters will give a thumbs up

ParticleMan said:
That's not why it's being dropped.


That this thread is garnering such passionate responses is astounding to me.

Then why is it being dropped. Don't say because 20% of the school didn't attend. WHY didn't they attend. The 80% who did attend are now being asked to miss out on a fun event (God forbid we allow kids to have any fun events in school unless it is proven to increase test scores) to accommodate 20% who didn't want to attend, or whose parent's didn't want them to attend.

Woot said:

shanabasha said:
Regardless of whether the choice was right or wrong, just want to make clear that the Principal and PTA leadership made the choice, not the SB community. There was no open discussion that included the SB community.

As evidenced by this board you would not reach consensus. Plus, this topic is not about learning and doesn't warrant a large forum. The Principal and PTA made a decision after careful consideration.

I agree that you would not reach a consensus. Just pointing out that it's not like the SB community got together about this (not that it necessarily should have) and had a majority consensus.

spontaneous said:

kibbegirl said:

spontaneous said:
I did read the thread. I read the multiple references to Jejovah's Witnesses being offended by Halloween and the school in question having a large number of families who follow that religion. This non-religiousevent is being dropped to make them comfortable. That isn't right.

Did I miss something? I didn't read anything about JW's. Could you provide more info about this?

I think the posters actually called them "Witnesses" and not Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm not going back through four pages of posts to find them, but there were references.

I surmised this from context clues and my experience with JWs (including my grandparents for a period). I might be wrong.

But it doesn't matter...mamabear has eloquently explained why this decision was taken. I'm shocked that so many don't seem to be able to hear and understand what she has said

annielou said:
Consideration of what exactly? I'd like to hear one cogent argument about why Halloween celebrations constitute devil worship. All holidays with ancient Christian or pagan roots have Eves: Christmas Eve, New Years Eve, and the newly minted high school reunion drinking celebration called Thanksgiving Eve. The point is that the Eves have all become celebratory over the centuries and All Hallows' Eve is just one of those. If a few families don't view a particular holiday as secular, then fine, don't participate. But I want to hear someone actually articulate the devil/occult theory and see how many liberal MOL posters will give a thumbs up

From a quick google:

Celebrations like Halloween are in conflict with Bible teachings. The Bible warns: “There must never be anyone among you who . . . practices divination, who is soothsayer, augur or sorcerer, who uses charms, consults ghosts or spirits, or calls up the dead.”—Deuteronomy 18:10, 11, The Jerusalem Bible; see alsoLeviticus 19:31; Galatians 5:19-21.

There's more... but you can find it yourself if you are, in fact, actually interested.