JROTC Gone From San Fran Schools

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by jamzmom, Nov 15, 2006.

  1. jamzmom

    jamzmom Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    3
    Posting this here in these threads for open discussion.

    I'm at a loss. Just so disheartened for those kids who were loving that program.
     
  2. USNA69

    USNA69 Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,771
    Likes Received:
    0
    jamz,
    Could you tell us a little more? I know their school board has had problems over the military "don't ask, don't tell" policy which was President Clinton's solution to gays in the military. If this is the case, the Federal Government has been quite successful in threatening to pull funding to colleges who refuse to allow recruiters on their campuses. Maybe they should do the same for school boards who refuse to allow JROTC units.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2006
  3. jamzmom

    jamzmom Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    3
    USNA69, I can only fill you in on what was going on with it in the news yesterday. The don't ask, don't tell policy ploy doesn't fit with JROTC in my opinion. A news snippet follows my comments. I was both appauled & saddened. I've heard it many times before: JROTC is geared towards kids in poverty, JROTC is a recruiting tool for the military.... Blah, blah, blah. This program kept a good many high schoolers out of trouble and focused on something bigger than themselves. Community service, leadership, classes on ethics & in our case Naval Science, public speaking, ect. Club groups such as orienteering, rifle & drill had the kids in competition which ain't a bad thing. The instructors were military guys who pushed college, babysat kids who didn't come from the best of family life, helped mold them into responsible young people. Sure there were a handful of troubled kids in the 130 cadet unit but from what I saw, this program turned them around & gave them the self confidence they needed to go out into the world. Most who graduated the class did not go into military life. Almost ALL ended up in colleges. And this with help from the instructors there. I witnessed these guys personally calling colleges on some of the kid's behalf. Recruiters were often kept at bay until the kids were old enough to make choices on their own. I'm just so sad that the kids & this program are being used as a political tool. :unhappy:

    San Francisco to Boot JROTC Programs

    Wednesday, November 15, 2006

    SAN FRANCISCO — High schools across the city soon will no longer have Junior Reserve Officers'Training Corps programs after officials decided to eliminate them because of the Pentagon's"don't ask, don't tell"policy regarding gay service members.

    The Board of Education voted 4-2 late Tuesday to phase out the JROTC from schools over the next two years, despite protest from hundreds of students who rallied outside the meeting.

    The resolution passed says the military's ban on openly gay soldiers violates the school district's equal rights policy for gays.

    The school district and the military currently share the $1.6 million annual cost of the program. About 1,600 San Francisco students participate in JROTC at seven high schools across the district.

    Cadets and instructors who spoke at the meeting and rallied outside argued that the program teaches leadership, organizational skills, personal responsibility and other important values.

    "This is where the kids feel safe, the one place they feel safe,"said Robert Powell, a JROTC instructor."You're going to take that away from them?"

    Mayor Gavin Newsom called severing ties with the JROTC"a bad idea"that penalized students without having any practical effect on the Pentagon's policy on gays in the military.

    "If people want to participate in it and their families want them to participate, I think they have a right to participate without putting them in the political peril of being in this ideological debate,"he said.

    Lt. Cmdr. Joe Carpenter, a Pentagon spokesman, has said he didn't know of any other school district having barred JROTC from its campuses.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2006
  4. jamzmom

    jamzmom Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm on a roll.... I found what Bill O'Reilly said last night very interesting & agree. But heres the rub.... These JROTC kids are not military yet. They're kids looking into a career choice just like they do with organizations like FBLA that are in our schools as well. Gay rights? C'mon. I'm not buying it. This is anti-war political bs that ended up making kids pay the price for a handful of people's beliefs. I try to stay out of political debating but this has burnt a hole in my craw.

    San Francisco Values Front and Center

    Thursday , November 16, 2006

    By Bill O'Reilly

    Tuesday night by a vote of 4-2, the San Francisco Board of Ed banned Junior ROTC training in seven city high schools, throwing 1,600 students out of those clubs. This is a direct insult to the U.S. military and violates the civil rights, I believe, of the ROTC students. The federal government should immediately suspend all federal aid to San Francisco schools.

    There's no reason to ban JROTC. Nobody's required to join it. And if a student with parental approval wants to investigate a career in the military, every American school should encourage that.

    Obviously, the military is protecting us from terrorists, North Korea and other dangerous people. But those who believe in San Francisco values don't see it that way. They think the military is bad, the don't ask, don't tell policy evil.

    Where is the ACLU on this? If a gay club was banned by the Board of Ed, wouldn't the ACLU be there in a heartbeat? You bet they would.

    But San Francisco values only go one way and are largely undemocratic.

    In Massachusetts, for example, the legislature refuses to let the citizens vote on gay marriage, even though 170,000 folks signed a petition asking to do that. Nope, no vote. You don't vote on civil rights, say the SP corps. Only marriage is not a civil right. If it were, polygamists could marry, triads could marry, you could marry your mom.

    As "Talking Points" has said before, if one alternative lifestyle is allowed a license to wed, all must be under equal protection.

    There is no constitutional guarantee to marry, or to drive a car, or procure a liquor license for that matter. The states make those decisions based upon what's best for the public good. In every single up-down vote on the subject, traditional marriage between a man and a woman wins.

    But San Francisco values do not honor the voting process. If they believe something is right, they'll try to impose it.

    Now we asked Nancy Pelosi what she thought of the ROTC ban. She's hiding under her desk. And San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said he was glad the school board waited until after the national election because, "cheap-shot artists like O'Reilly and FOX would have exploited the vote."

    Not exploiting, just reporting, Mr. Mayor. And you're welcome here any time to explain the situation. But of course, Newsom's not going to appear because San Francisco values don't encourage debate. The whole idea is to sneak things through, go around the folks.

    In a democracy, there's not a lot of value to that approach. But in San Francisco and Massachusetts, it is how they do business.
     
  5. WAMom68

    WAMom68 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,144
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think it is asinine that they are eliminating JROTC in their schools. They say the "don't ask, don't tell" policy violates the school districts equal rights of gays - what about the rights of the kids that want to do JROTC? Nobody is forced to join, so let the individual make that decision based on their own conscience (Oops! I forgot we aren't allowed freedom of choice in San Francisco).

    If the school board doesn't like the military's policy then work to change it, don't penalize the kids. By eliminating JROTC the school board is reducing opportunities for the kids in their district.

    Side note:
    I wish the high school my 14 year old attends had JROTC. I think there would be a lot of interest in our school district.
     
  6. Cougar_62

    Cougar_62 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with WAMom, our school, which is only 4 years old can't afford ROTC. Maybe we can pick up the slack from San Francisco. It's a shame that the school board there would penalize their own children trying to send some anti-military message. :thumbdown:

    All these kids should immediately go out and investigate Civil Air Patrol or Naval Cadets.
     
  7. Just_A_Mom

    Just_A_Mom Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    2
    The "powers that be" in SF are using their children as political pawns. They are not putting the kids first, nor do they have the best interest of the kids in mind when they made this idiotic decision. JROTC units do not supply fodder for our military. What they do is teach discipline, citizenship and respect.

    There is no rule in JROTC regarding participation by gay students. They are free to participate. Our local paper ran an article the other day on this since a large high school has a MC-JROTC unit. A recent graduate who is gay said her was nervous he would be kicked out when the instructor found out he was gay. Not only didn't it happen, but the instructor told him he didn't give a damn if he was gay - he just had to be willing to do the work.
     
  8. nosmileysforme

    nosmileysforme Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    0
    Posters on the Parents Cafe have written that the school board members that voted to eliminate the JROTC program have been voted out of office and that theirs was a "lame duck" vote. There is significant hope that the next school board will reverse this boards mistake. Seems to be a trend these days.
     
  9. Zaphod

    Zaphod Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    4
    I have an idea. Since San Francisco has decided to hate the military so much, I propose that when Kim Jong Il finally decides to lob one at the United States, that the military NOT intercept it if its target is SF.

    Hey, they think they can do better without the military? Let them try singing '60s hippie songs while the nuke re-enters. Maybe it'll work.

    Anything else I have to say about these vermin will require vulgarities, and I'm just not in the mood.
     
  10. USNA69

    USNA69 Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,771
    Likes Received:
    0
    Zap, for once we agree.
     
  11. Zaphod

    Zaphod Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    4
    Bah.

    I think you and I agree on more than either of us gives us credit for. :wink:
     
  12. USNA69

    USNA69 Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,771
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ha ha, just giving you a hard time. You're right, we do.
     
  13. kp2001

    kp2001 USMMA Alumnus

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,153
    Likes Received:
    113

    Anyway we can launch a pre-emptive strike before Kim Jong Il? Whatever happened to the scientists that said California was going to break off the US and fall into the ocean? I'm still waiting:biggrin:
     
  14. nosmileysforme

    nosmileysforme Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    0
    Heck; why not nuke the entire west coast? Surely those four school board members who voted out the JROTC (and by the way three of them were then voted out of office, but why pick nits), speak with one voice for the 150,000,000 (give or take a couple of mill) pinkos west of the Rockies. We should get one really gynormous rock saw and just cut right down the continantal divide. That'll git em. Yeeee hawwww!
     
  15. nosmileysforme

    nosmileysforme Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey, but on a serious note, what do you all think about bringing back the draft? Sure there are both upsides and downsides, and of course it will never happen, but do you think a draft solve or cause more problems. Sorry...can't elaborate right now...Family Dad is on...got to go...
     
  16. Zaphod

    Zaphod Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    4
    I oppose the draft. Too much garbage would be raked in with the good stuff.

    Isn't it interesting that the same schmucks who burned their draft cards in the 60's now want to reinstate it? :rolleyes:

    This is pure politics on Rangle's part.
     
  17. USNA69

    USNA69 Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,771
    Likes Received:
    0
    Damn it Zap, I am getting tired of agreeing with you.
    I suffered the Zumwalt Navy of the '70s. A lot of Navy enlistees were there only to avoid the Army Vietnam draft. It was, without a doubt, the nadir of Navy enlisted manpower. Several years ago, I spent 10 days riding the USS Stennis from Pearl Harbor to San Diego. The quality of the US sailor, is without a doubt, the best it has ever been. They are professionals who do their job superbly. Any of the young candidates now planning a career as a Naval Officer will be proud to lead this group of men and women.

    The problem with volunteers is that the Government is going to have to pay them. Doing wars "on the cheap" may cause our leaders, regrettably, to revisit the draft.

    The one problem I have with an all-volunteer force is that it is almost solidly manned by the lower middle class. The upper class who have the money to run for leadership positions in our country are growing further and further from the "real" world of understanding the sacrifices that our troops are making and making decisions based on this knowledge. I regret this.

    But to use the draft to form and promote social policy, to ensure San Fransciscoians understand the military, I would never support. Besides, the military is where it is because we do not have to deal with their ilk.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2006
  18. nosmileysforme

    nosmileysforme Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    0
    "But to use the draft to form and promote social policy, to ensure San Fransciscoians understand the military, I would never support. Besides, the military is where it is because we do not have to deal with their ilk."

    So, it's the rock saw and nukes then. Yep; serves them right. In fact, we should nuke all the blue states (or is it the red states, I can never remember) because once the citizenry has been tainted by liberal San Francisco values everyone knows there's no way back.

    Yeah; I agree the draft's a bad idea except that right now the military is too small for the job were asking it to perform and the troop rotations into Iraq are too frequent and too long. I suspect this is going to be a temporary problem however and the draft would probably be a very bad idea in the long run. And Zap, I agree, it's almost certainly just politics.

    By the way, I erred; it's American Dad not Family Dad.
     
  19. Just_A_Mom

    Just_A_Mom Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    2
    The reason the Democrats want to bring back the draft is not because of numbers and troop rotation. It is to provide an "opportunity" for upper class, white Republican families to sacrifice their sons and daughters for a cause which they whole-heartedly support.

    The Democrats could care less about troop numbers and troops who are expected to stay deployed too long and re-deploy too soon.

    Unfortunately, the Democrats cannot see the forest through the trees. They complain how the military attracts high rates of persons of color and lower-socio economic backgrounds without thinking that those kids who are signing up are reaping great benefits. These kids the Democrats are "worried" about are safer in Iraq than being sucked into gangs in their own neighborhood.

    A young adult with no feeling of direction and no career goals, regardless of socio-ecomonic background is better off serving in the military for a few years, rather than wasting it away in college partying and just getting by.
    It is too bad more middle and upper class parents don't see that advantage. If they did then maybe the Democrats would not feel picked on and we would have a few less spoiled brats.

    So once again the Democrats are taking the wrong approach. Instead of calling to reinstate the draft - they should be encouraging parents of all colors and socio-economic backgrounds to support their children if they wish to enlist and serve in the military.
     
  20. Zaphod

    Zaphod Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    4
    :yllol:

    That's exactly right.

    I also maintain that if the day comes that the United States of America can no longer produce enough quality individuals willing to volunteer to defend it with violence and at the possible cost of their own lives, then it will have lost its right to survive as a free republic, and its people will have earned whatever horrors befall them as a result.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2006

Share This Page