Youth Defence in schools

Sonics2k

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'm pretty sure David Quinn and the rest of his cohorts in the Iona Institute, Cóir, Youth Defence etc. would like Twilight because Bella is a submissive drone once she meets Edward Cullen.

Right up to the point they read 50 Shades of Grey, a spin off of Twilight.

Sonics2k

Sonics2k wrote: »

Right up to the point they read 50 Shades of Grey, a spin off of Twilight.

teaching us that abusive relationships are ok because he's like omg so hot

also what "Oh, and let's not forget: dog f*cks baby." ?

sbsquarepants

gbee wrote: »

I know. No worries at ALL there.

It's great that your happy, and that is what it's all about - but my opinion is that you've missed out a little bit! Variety is the spice of life and all that!

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Is it wrong for a Man and a Woman to love each other and to live their lives for each other totally? Is it wrong to propose an ideal? There is nothing wrong with looking for the person who will love you completely and totally for who you are. Just because this happens to be a religious point of view, does not make it wrong. People have been very happily in love all their lives with one person, with each others company. Are you saying we are not entitled to choose this path... Are you saying we are not entitled to teach this as a choice in life?

As a choice yes, knock yourselves out.
As the best way, only way, right way or even the preferred way - absolutely not.

qrrgprgua wrote: »

The whole thread is against Christian teaching on sex in school,.Right?

Is it wrong to offer this as a Choice. I don't see why people are taking offence to youth being offered a choice about sex. Having sex in a loving relationship which is faithful has made many people very happy and fulfilled. I don't see why people are taking offence to this be taught as a option in school.

Again, as a choice - no problem. But as with ususal youth defence bullshít - it's not being presented as a choice but as the correct way (see the abortion billboards thread for more of the same)

marienbad wrote: »

once you reach the age of consent have as much safe responsible sex as you can , on the beach, in the woods, in the parents bedroom, one night stands, week end affairs , summer romances,same sex xplorations, alone , with a friend. Threesomes foursomes orgies should be experienced at least once .

Hola, eres sin hogar:D

You're right, life is short - be safe, have fun, end of.
People are all different, that save yourself for marriage bollox just would not work for most people i'd imagine. It certainly wouldn't for me (in fact i'd be a very frustrated 38 year old virgin by now). If that's what you want to do then that's fine it's no ones business but your own, but it's also no ones business but your own if you want to shag for ireland. Personal responsibility is what it's all about - my body, my choice, my responsibility - no exceptions.
This is yet another reason why religious groups just cannot be trusted to educate kids - they just tell too many god damn lies, they can't seem to help themselves!

Ciaran0

qrrgprgua wrote: »

And I ask. Should we teach our children to have sex with the person they want to spend their whole life with, with the person they totally love?

You're working on the assumption that everyone will fall in love and spend their entire life with someone. What if one doesn't fall in love? Are they to be exempt from sex, just because the right person never comes along? What if one doesn't want to spend their life with the one partner, they'd rather stay single? Should they have sex, seeing as they're not going to commit? What about same sex relationships, for whom marrying isn't an option.

The truth is, sex is awesome, and it's for everyone. Everyone(excluding asexuals) gets sexual urges and feelings, yet not everyone fits into the mode of living proposed by the SPHE curriculum and supported by you, therefore, it's unfair to teach it as "the better option," because that isn't true for everyone.

joseph brand

qrrgprgua wrote: »

I have to laugh on this who discussion. My Daughter is mad into the whole Twilight movies.. I have to say I find the vampire genre not to my taste. until to my surprise she told me that they only have sex after they got married. Seems it was one of the top gross Chick flic movies..


Waiting for the right person is the best thing to do. I am not saying right/Wrong. but the best option.

Are you talking about pious Vampires and abstinence? It probably makes perfect sense when one believes in the supernatural.

The honeymoon wouldn't be warm and sunny for obvious reasons.

Corkfeen

Wait, till his daughter gets as far as True Blood. :pac: Using teen Vampire fiction to backup a point is unusual...

Daftendirekt

bluewolf wrote: »

teaching us that abusive relationships are ok because he's like omg so hot

also what "Oh, and let's not forget: dog f*cks baby." ?

I don't think there was actually any dog-baby bestiality, but there was something about a werewolf finding its soulmate in a baby and becoming infatuated with it. The implication being that when the baby grew up it would live happily ever after with wolfboy.

You might think that sounds more than a little creepy.

And you'd be right.

susan2012

Actually you are incorrect here: I am a teacher and the developer of the On Track programme and Una registered the domain name as that is her job. It's actually a very broad programme dealing with self-esteem, bullying, relationships and other important issues, so I can't understand the attempt to make such a fuss. It has been used across the country and has received great reviews by both teachers and students. It's nothing to do with Youth Defence or any other group in any case.

Thanks, Susan.

rainbow kirby

susan2012 wrote: »

It's nothing to do with Youth Defence or any other group in any case.

Never believe anything until it has officially been denied :pac:

Ickle Magoo

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Never believe anything until it has officially been denied :pac:

By someone unverifiable claiming to be something...

Skrynesaver

Hi Susan,

Are you anything to the Susan that is now the site admin in the RIPE record?

A shame the Organisation entry is empty, the denial would be more credible if the registring organisation were the department of education for example, though in fairness the RIPE records aren't verified so you could bluff an inoffensive entry if you wanted to...

Ellis Dee

MagicMarker wrote: »

I couldn't think of anything more boring than sex with 1 person throughout one's whole life.

Yes indeed, especially if that 1 person is oneself. Which is what I suspect may well be the case with a lot of those Youth Defence wan- sorry onanists.:D:D:D

sbsquarepants

susan2012 wrote: »

Actually you are incorrect here: I am a teacher and the developer of the On Track programme and Una registered the domain name as that is her job. It's actually a very broad programme dealing with self-esteem, bullying, relationships and other important issues, so I can't understand the attempt to make such a fuss. It has been used across the country and has received great reviews by both teachers and students. It's nothing to do with Youth Defence or any other group in any case.

Thanks, Susan.

Susan, susan, susan, lies make the baby jesus cry.:mad:

oceanclub

Hi all,

Just to be clear, was the WHOIS information of the site changed since this thread started from Una Ni Mhathuna (I presume of the famous Mhathuna clan) to a Susan Erbacher, who I presume has written an article in Youth Defence's Solas magazine?

http://www.youthdefence.ie/am_cms_media/solas-april-2010.pdf

(page 14)

http://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/yourontrack.org



susan2012, would you happen to be this Susan by any chance?

EDIT: Just to note the WHOIS info refers to 2 Susans; it also mentions Susan Scanlon, who I presume is the author mentioned in the OP.


P.

Nodin

Can't think of any suitable song lyrics with "Susan" in them. Truly my godlessness has led me to desolation.

oceanclub

If Susan comes back to this thread, could she confirm that the two Susans mentioned in the WHOIS info are both in fact the same person (presumably one is a maiden name)?

P.

Piste

Just give the JC kiddies 50 Shades of Grey to read for English class for the sake of balance. Be Grand.

Piste

Also it appears www.yourontrack.org is "under construction". Fancy that.

Piste

Piste wrote: »

Also it appears www.yourontrack.org is "under construction". Fancy that.

my on track? my what? or am i missing something?

Piste

No, it's Your Ont Rack. Y'know, an Ont Rack.

oh, those.

MagicMarker

Maybe they want to get down with kool kids?

"Yo, ur on track".

Delirium

I was expecting a Monorail fanclub site :P

Sonics2k

Piste wrote: »

Also it appears www.yourontrack.org is "under construction". Fancy that.

*twitch*

Tears in Rain

susan2012 wrote: »

Actually you are incorrect here: I am a teacher and the developer of the On Track programme and Una registered the domain name as that is her job. It's actually a very broad programme dealing with self-esteem, bullying, relationships and other important issues, so I can't understand the attempt to make such a fuss. It has been used across the country and has received great reviews by both teachers and students. It's nothing to do with Youth Defence or any other group in any case.

Thanks, Susan.

The author, Susan Scanlan, claims that it has nothing to do with YD. However if you google the author, you'll find she's contributed an article entitled "Actively Prolife" to a 2007 issue of Solas, the YD magazine. She also contributed an article to a 2002 issue of Solas. That means she has at least 10 years inolvement with Youth Defence.

I'm having a hard time finding out the full names of the other authors, beyond that they're called "L. Gorman" and "C. O'Meara", which means what follows is just speculation.

However, if you google "Linda Gorman" and "Carolyn O'Meara" you'll find that both also have been heavily involved with Youth Defence upwards of ten years, with both contributing several articles, with Linda being particularly active at Youth Defence stalls around the country, and with Carolyn being some sort of spokesperson giving several statements on YD's behalf.

So considering the three authors have a combined 30+ year involvement in the organisation, and the domain is registered by one of the Nic Mhathúnas, I find it a bit strange that she claims that it has 'nothing to do with Youth Defence'

Here's where the author names are given: http://www.cormicans.com/Post-Primary/SPHE/On-Track/58093/

And here's all the juicy YD goss':

http://www.google.ie/search?q=%22susan+scanlan%22+%22youth+defence%22

http://www.google.ie/search?q=%22carolyn o'meara%22+%22youth+defence%22

http://www.google.ie/search?q=%22linda%20gorman%22+%22youth+defence%22

Tears in Rain

Also to note, there seems to be some confusion about the Susans, there's a Susan Erbacher and a Susan Scanlan, both having contributed articles to Youth Defence's magazine, and the latter the author of the Junior Cert textbook.

They are the same person.

http://www.facebook.com/susan.erbacher

Also, Linda Gorman (see above) has contributed to Solas as both "Linda Gorman" and "Linda Ni Ghormáin" if you're looking for articles.

fitz0

That's some fine detective work.

EduKate

susan2012 wrote: »

It's nothing to do with Youth Defence or any other group in any case.

Thanks, Susan.

Right, the website just happened to be owned by the head of YD.

And you just happened to write for YD publications.

And the other author, Linda Gorman, just happens to write for YD publications.

And the third listed author, Carolyn O'Meara, also just happens to write for YD publications.

And Youth Defence just happens to have a campaign called 'On Track', the same as the title of your book, which according to Youth Defences magazine 'Solas'

" We’ve also been fine-tuning our On Track schools program which will explain the benefits of abstinence to Irish school students."

But this is all a coincidence, and has nothing to do with Youth Defence :rolleyes:

oceanclub

"Susan" has also left a comment on broadsheet.ie, inspiring many questions:

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/07/13/anything-good-in-the-junior-cert-sphe-book/#comment-224432

Actually you are incorrect here: I am a teacher and the developer of the On Track programme and Una registered the domain name as that is her job. It’s actually a very broad programme dealing with self-esteem, bullying, relationships and other important issues, so I can’t understand the attempt to make such a fuss. It has been used across the country and has received great reviews by both teachers and students. It’s nothing to do with Youth Defence or any other group in any case.

1. Susan, how did you become the developer of this program? What is the hiring process exactly, and who hired you?

2. How did Una Nic Mhathuna, another people involved in Youth Defence, also get a job in the On Track programme? What is her job title, which involves doing IT work?

P.

Corkfeen

I suspect that it isn't long before this hits the mainstream media. Hence, YD rapidly changing details to make it appear innocuous. :pac: It's rather funny that this is what's showing up on her wall, yet she has no affiliation to YD apparently...

mcmoustache

Susan, why do you lie?

Your lies are making the Baby Jesus cry.

:mad:

PopePalpatine

Youth Defence and self-esteem? I don't see that working out too well.

oceanclub

So does anyone know exactly how such school books are tendered? What is the process? How does one end up being the author of such a school book?

P.

Tears in Rain

I didn't want to start re-posting things here that the author posted on facebook, since I thought it was going a little too far with the detectivery. But seeing as someone else did it, here's a particularly wonderful example of one of her posts, justifying flashing gore photos of aborted foetuses at children:

Susan Erbacher Well said Abby. After all Our Blessed Lady showed Hell to the children of Fatima who were aged 7, 9 and 10. So if Our Lady thought it appropriate to show Hell to little children, surely it is also appropriate to let children see pictures of aborted babies, when their parents think they are ready of course. 30 September 2011

Galvasean

"Oh crap, we're getting ripped apart on the internets! Quickly, copy n' paste a denial and run for the hills!"

Corkfeen

Tears in Rain wrote: »

I didn't want to start re-posting things here that the author posted on facebook, since I thought it was going a little too far with the detectivery. But seeing as someone else did it, here's a particularly wonderful example of one of her posts, justifying flashing gore photos of aborted foetuses at children:

I'm of the opinion that it's wiser to not publicly include a link to her facebook but to get a screenshot. This is more to avoid her denying that she has anything to do with them. :pac: Since she'll simply keep changing the info to cover it up.

Sarky

Christians just can't internet.

Galvasean

It's a good thing hey don't know about our secret weapon... screengrab!

The Mad Hatter

Piste wrote: »

No, it's Your Ont Rack. Y'know, an Ont Rack.

Nonononono. It's actually a subtly-hidden anagram. It says "Crank our toy," which I guess is what we're supposed to do while we wait until marriage.

FouxDaFaFa

when their parents think they're ready, of course.

FFS, when exactly is the right time to show your child pictures of dead babies? I hesitate to say "pictures of aborted foetuses" because often the pictures on display are of stillborn babies and extremely late-stage abortions which are illegal in most parts of the world.

I cannot believe these people have a say in educating our youth. I thought this thread was kind of amusing at first but now I'm really annoyed.

I'd have much more respect for everyone involved if they would just be honest.

Eggonyerface

Oh dear, I Susan seems to have egg on her face. I doubt she'll be back on this thread

sbsquarepants

Ah, i think the bold Susan will shake it off and get back to the business of making a nuissance of herself soon enough. [DELETED BY MODERATOR]
All these lies in the name of jesus - [DELETED BY MODERATOR]

Rule 9 from your very own magic book "Thou shalt not bear false witness".
I'm not going to sugar coat this for you - you're not "on track" [DELETED BY MODERATOR]

robindch

^^^ sb, calm down please.

housetypeb

Piste wrote: »

Just give the JC kiddies 50 Shades of Grey to read for English class for the sake of balance. Be Grand.

Teach the controversy!

oceanclub

I rang the Department of Education earlier; they say they do not tender or vet schoolbooks (apart from some language onse); essentially, they publish a curriculum and it's up to individual schools to decide which books to use to cater for that.

P.

sbsquarepants

robindch wrote: »

^^^ sb, calm down please.

Sorry boss - i get an adrenaline rush when the holy folk get caught telling porkies!:D

(PS: I didn't think i was too bad!)

Splinters

This thread has been absolutely hilarious. Every time qrrgprgua started up with one of those "Is it not right...." remarks I could imagine the epic oscar winning soundtrack rising in the background.

And then Susan, poor Susan.

This has been comedy gold

Galvasean

It's funny until you realise that such oddball opinions are festering in the Irish education system.

oceanclub

Galvasean wrote: »

It's funny until you realise that such oddball opinions are festering in the Irish education system.

http://www.paddydoyle.com/ruairi-quinns-speech-hes-now-minister-for-education/

Launching a scathing attack on the Department of Education, Labour’s Ruairi Quinn said he had lodged a series of simple questions since February seeking details about the nature and ownership of schools and the location and name of schools in the ownership of a religious order or a Roman Catholic bishop.


However, the department had refused to provide such information.


“Either officials in the department are members of secret societies, such as the Knights of St Columbanus and Opus Dei, and have taken it upon themselves to protect the interests of these clerical orders at this point in time. . . or, alternatively, the minister is politically incompetent and incapable of managing the department,” Mr Quinn told the Dail.

expectationlost

didn't read all this thread because...^ but the reason youth defence style abstinence teaching is bad is because they might not teach other stuff like safe sex, but would current schools teach that even if they were using the book, i hope so?

chances are even if the dept of ed did directly vet these books ibet they would pass muster, the burecrats wouldn't be able to see the problem or would say that all the issues would be dealth with elsewhere, same thing happening in the uk with creationism.

go through the inspection reports and see if you can find any mention of this area http://education.ie/en/Publications/Inspection-Reports-Publications/Subject-Inspection-Reports-List/