wazua Sat, Feb 1, 2025
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In | Register

2 Pages12>
Redefining Family
Pedes
#1 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:49:17 AM
Rank: Member


Joined: 9/30/2013
Posts: 659
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.
If you stay ready, no need to get ready.
Kaigangio
#2 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 11:08:21 AM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 2/27/2007
Posts: 2,768
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


A cow will always be a cow no matter the viewing angle!!!!
...besides, the presence of a safe alone does not signify that there is money inside...
tycho
#3 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:49:49 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.


Muriel
#4 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:56:04 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?
maka
#5 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:00:30 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 4/22/2010
Posts: 11,522
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?

Am sure it incorporates akina Adam and Steve....
possunt quia posse videntur
tycho
#6 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:08:20 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?


I'm looking at a time when the family doesn't exist, hence not there to be defined.
Muriel
#7 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:20:43 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?


I'm looking at a time when the family doesn't exist, hence not there to be defined.



No sir,

You have said it has already redefined itself at a rapid rate. So its still there. Or are you thinking of future?
Muriel
#8 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:22:23 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
maka wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?

Am sure it incorporates akina Adam and Steve....



Most likely.

They have been getting traction recently.

But Pedes has given us broken news. What are the curriculum developers thinking of?
tycho
#9 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:30:00 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?


I'm looking at a time when the family doesn't exist, hence not there to be defined.



No sir,

You have said it has already redefined itself at a rapid rate. So its still there. Or are you thinking of future?


I'm talking about now. No one has control of definition any more. But maybe some will see this 'in the future'.
InnovateGuy
#10 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:31:20 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 11/15/2012
Posts: 1,110
Is education dynamic? If the society is dynamic, so should be the education system.
Live Full Die Empty - Les Brown.
Pedes
#11 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:25:58 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 9/30/2013
Posts: 659
Muriel wrote:
maka wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?

Am sure it incorporates akina Adam and Steve....



Most likely.

They have been getting traction recently.

But Pedes has given us broken news. What are the curriculum developers thinking of?


Kids from single parent families are wondering why are the pictures in the textbooks have mom and dad and watoto. If theirs has one parent missing then is it not a family?
Others are asking if nanny/maid etc are to be included cause they refer to the as aunty.
So for the purpose of them they want to have pictures/illustration of single parenthood as a family.
If you stay ready, no need to get ready.
wazuaguest
#12 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:37:57 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 2/9/2012
Posts: 576
Kaigangio wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


A cow will always be a cow no matter the viewing angle!!!!

"How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg." - Abraham Lincoln
Africa belongs to Africans.
Muriel
#13 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:48:21 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
Pedes wrote:
Muriel wrote:
maka wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?

Am sure it incorporates akina Adam and Steve....



Most likely.

They have been getting traction recently.

But Pedes has given us broken news. What are the curriculum developers thinking of?


Kids from single parent families are wondering why are the pictures in the textbooks have mom and dad and watoto. If theirs has one parent missing then is it not a family?
Others are asking if nanny/maid etc are to be included cause they refer to the as aunty.
So for the purpose of them they want to have pictures/illustration of single parenthood as a family.


Hiyo yao si ni 'single parent family'. Shida ya definition iko wapi sasa?

Kama ni picha tu waongezwe haraka before akina Steve hijack hii maneno.



Blackberry
#14 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:49:19 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 11/9/2007
Posts: 420
Location: Nairobi
wazuaguest wrote:
Kaigangio wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


A cow will always be a cow no matter the viewing angle!!!!

"How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg." - Abraham Lincoln


Lets be sensitive...i believe the carriculum developers have the young minds at heart

Opinion is free, truth is sacred.




Muriel
#15 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:51:12 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?


I'm looking at a time when the family doesn't exist, hence not there to be defined.



No sir,

You have said it has already redefined itself at a rapid rate. So its still there. Or are you thinking of future?


I'm talking about now. No one has control of definition any more. But maybe some will see this 'in the future'.


Ok, though it is still being controlled. What about the future? Is there a future?
mb'oss
#16 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:59:14 PM
Rank: New-farer


Joined: 8/26/2013
Posts: 29
wazuaguest wrote:
Kaigangio wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


A cow will always be a cow no matter the viewing angle!!!!

"How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg." - Abraham Lincoln


Paraphrased from the Bible nothing that is happening here on God's earth is new. Whatever you see or hear now has happened before. After all the hoopla the original definition of the family will stay as it is . My 40cts


Life's for the living
tycho
#17 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:11:15 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


The family isn't being redefined, it has already redefined itself, and it's redefining itself at a very rapid rate. Our educators and dictionaries may even be lagging behind. In fact they are lagging behind.




What is the up-to-date definition?


I'm looking at a time when the family doesn't exist, hence not there to be defined.



No sir,

You have said it has already redefined itself at a rapid rate. So its still there. Or are you thinking of future?


I'm talking about now. No one has control of definition any more. But maybe some will see this 'in the future'.


Ok, though it is still being controlled. What about the future? Is there a future?


'Future' depends on 'self consciousness'. It's being created by the kind of dialogue we're having.

But so far, no one is controlling the definition, most are trying to, but the results are a failure. With DOMA (defense of marriage act) gone, the gates have been thrown wide open.

The puzzle is how humanity will handle the conversation.
washiku
#18 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:19:38 PM
Rank: Chief


Joined: 5/9/2007
Posts: 13,095
I thought we used to study types of families?smile Ama?
tycho
#19 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:31:11 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
mb'oss wrote:
wazuaguest wrote:
Kaigangio wrote:
Pedes wrote:
Some curriculum developers are advocating for redefinition of what a family is for the sake of the young kids from single parent homes.

And elsewhere the Oxford dictionary is contemplating redefining marriage.


A cow will always be a cow no matter the viewing angle!!!!

"How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg." - Abraham Lincoln


Paraphrased from the Bible nothing that is happening here on God's earth is new. Whatever you see or hear now has happened before. After all the hoopla the original definition of the family will stay as it is . My 40cts


While humanity progresses on the basis of what came before, our ancestors, symbols and our interpretations are bound to change, and they've always changed.

Like now, the economic experience in the family is changing. So are roles and expectations. But it's still about being human. We can also be sure the solutions will have to come from the past. Like Plato and Socrates, even Pythagoras may be brought back to life for advice; if it hasn't happened already.
seppuku
#20 Posted : Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:07:02 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 5/11/2010
Posts: 918
washiku wrote:
I thought we used to study types of families?smile Ama?


Yeah, but only nuclear and extended according to my recollection. Your link has more - which is good. In the end all these things - even Adam and Steve, I dare say, will be fully integrated into society. It is a matter of when, not if. It's okay to resist it, that's completely human. But it is necessary to know that one day, one freaking day, all these things we are abhorring now will be as normal as the sun rising from the east.
Learn first to treat your time as you would your money, then treat your money as you do your time.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Copyright © 2025 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.