Death education classes have been taught at Columbine High School, it has been learned.

The school that became the site of one of the nation's worst massacres this week, was in the headlines in the early 90's for offering death education classes to confused students!

One student even planned to kill herself after attending one of the classes, ABC NEWS reported in a 20/20 profile back in 1991.

"We talked about what we wanted to look like in our casket," student Tara Becker told ABC in an interview.

"Tara Becker believes she was seduced into a suicide attempt by her Death Ed class."

Tara was a junior at Columbine High in Littleton, Colorado, reported Tom Jarriel.

A transcript of the stunning ABC NEWS broadcast was obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.

Anchor Hugh Downs introduced the segment: "Your child could be in a class that only a few years ago might have been unthinkable- death education. These classes are supposed to prepare young people for coping with death and while most schools make it part of a health class, some actually make it an entire course."

Becker told the news magazine: "I had thought about [suicide] as a possible option for a lot of years, but I never would have gone through with it, never, because I wasn't brave enough. The things that we learned in the class taught us how to be brave enough to face death."

Jarriel summarized: "Graphically introducing death to impressionable young minds is at the core of the controversy over death education in our public schools. Will students walk away from here with clearer understanding of death or with nightmarish memories that might haunt them for life and perhaps, inadvertently, suggest death as an answer to adolescent problems?"


-- grim reaper (can it@get any.weirder?), April 25, 1999


Was this class still offered after the 20/20 interview eight years ago? If not, this post has absolutely no relevance to anything, since no student currently enrolled at Columbine High would have taken the class. Please explain its relevance to Y2K.

-- Old Git (, April 25, 1999.

As most tiller's of the soil know, the law of sowing and reaping is a spiritual law as well as physical. Galatians 6:9 gaurantees a crop!

Got good seed?


-- Y2Dave (, April 25, 1999.

Same relevance as rhubarb pie.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), April 25, 1999.

Old git - were you twinned at birth with Meerkat? Less of the home grown censorship please. Walk on by.

-- Andy (, April 25, 1999.

Growing food and cooking it is highly relevant to Y2K survival--unless, of course, you've found a means of nourishment requiring no food. One defunct class unfortunately sensationalized by a tabloid TV show eight years ago, and gleefully resurrected by a fifth-rate muck-raker today, has no bearing on the Columbine tragedy or Y2K in my opinion.

There is no demand not to post in my words, only two questions and an assertion. If you wish to disagree then by all means do so, but do not ascribe to my words meanings you pluck from thin air. Now, it appears to be the opinion of Grim Reaper that his or her post has some relevance to Y2K otherwise the decision would not have been made to post it on this forum. I ask again--Grim reaper, would you please explain the relevance of your post to Y2K?

-- Old Git (, April 25, 1999.

Old Git,

If Columbine is off topic, in your considered opinion, and you do not wish to see pieces of this nature, please explain the following...

"Leo, Leo--it was a GREAT essay until I came to the bit about marrying the Prom Queen. This is half the bloody problem, Leo, the Prom Queen has store-bought bazooms, very expensive designer clothes, fake nails, $5-10,000 worth of dental work, and that's not her real hair color, ya know, and her hobby is shopping and decorating. If she didn't have all that, she wouldn't BE the Prom Queen. If you could just change that to the law school's top graduate or the CEO of a large company or even simply soul-mate, then you'd have it made.

-- Old Git (, April 23, 1999.

And this....

"Why are we not surprised? Don't bother reading it, folks. It's the usual Mr. M sensationalism and it HEAVILY links the two Columbine shooters to Y2K: ". . . undeniably kooks. . .white supremacists, Goths, outcasts and loners. . . Y2K devotees." They "sounded doomsday warnings about the year 2000 and the end of the millennium." Then Mr. M switches to Y2K nuts and guns: ". . . Y2Kers are pretty sensitive about some topics. Specifically: Guns and restrictions on their ownership. (The conventional wisdom, such as it is, stresses that a happy Y2Ker is a well-armed Y2Ker. Have you bought your AR-15 yet?) So linking the shooters to Y2K touched a nerve."

And don't you love his description of this forum: "On Y2K tub-thumper Ed Yourdon's discussion forum, the threads filled quickly with breaking-news posts. 'Did anybody else hear that, and did you think, "Oh no, the news is going to go crazy talking about 'Y2K dangerous lunatics.'"' Other participants complained about liberal politicians talking about passing anti-gun laws."

-- Disgusted But Not Surprised Old Git (, April 21, 1999.

And other examples of your double standards, rather like a certain Meerkat that has seen fit to comment on topics he regards as off topic.

Less censorship please you two.

-- Andy (, April 25, 1999.

Eight? Years ago...? are mistaken...4 years ago...And while I'm on the subject, children do not contemplate suicide or homicide on the basis of ONE "class"...there must be other things going on, for a long period of time...Does the poster suggesting eight years have NO clue about human development, especially where children and adolescents are concerned....get with the program,...Influence begins in must be something HUGE in elementary school or high school to interfere with what is already happening by the time a child is 5 years old, if indeed that is pristine. Read some developmental psych books for goodness sake.

-- Donna (, April 25, 1999.

Andy, how very kind of you to take up for Grim Reaper! But surely GR could have answered my very simple question so that we didn't have to distract you and take up your time.

As for your file clippings, Andy, you have pasted two responses I made to certain posts. The first means little without the original post. I have no idea why you pasted the second response: I counted eight Y2Ks in it. Perhaps you pasted the wrong file clipping.

By the way, you seem to think I'm also this Meerkat fellow. Sorry, old chap, but apparently I'm not the only one who thinks some posts are too far off topic. Do I practice a double standard? Well, since you bring up the issue of standards I suppose any standards are better than no standards at all.

Now, no matter how greatly I appreciate your generous attempts to help, I'd much rather have had Grim Reaper elucidate upon the relevance of his post to Y2K. I hasten to emphasize that far from censoring GR, I've practically begged him to expound upon the subject. Since he has chosen not to answer, then in the interests of brevity I must consider my point made and the subject closed.

-- Old Git (, April 25, 1999.

There were other clippings from you pontificating on Columbine - all I'm asking is that you stop your censorship activity - free speech and all that. One minute it's ok for YOU to comment on Columbine, next it's not ok for somebody else.

Get it?

-- Andy (, April 25, 1999.

I like to read both of your posts, Old Git and Andy. Please stop nitpicking and get on with the living.

-- R. Wright (, April 26, 1999.

Oi, who said you could butt in? :)

-- Andy (, April 26, 1999.

Would you guys please grow up already......!!

If you can't manage to get along in a "virtual world", how the hell do we expect people to get along when they have to rub shoulders with eachother day in and day out? Can we try to accept eachothers viewpoints and move on??

-- anita (, April 26, 1999.

The relevance of this post to the topic of this forum is not evident in its text. Asking a poster to explain the relevance of his or her post to the topic of this forum is a fair question, which left unanswered indicates that the sender has no answer.

There's a vital difference between censorship and argument, between censorship and disagreement.

As a matter of fact, censorship here (other than by the webmaster) is impossible. It would take a dedicated and proficient hacker to remove part or all of any post.

-- Tom Carey (, April 27, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ