Homeschoolers do it better

[dajoga]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not that homeschooling families are afraid of competing with their public school counterparts. Homeschoolers have continually done well on academic tests and contests.

In 2000, the top three winners in the Scripps-Howard News Service's National Spelling Bee were all home-schooled. This is all the more remarkable when you consider that only 11 percent of the contestants were homeschoolers. That same year, homeschoolers placed first and second in the National Geography Bee.

There's more. According to official reports for the American College Testing Program (ACT), homeschoolers have scored higher on average than students in public and private schools. In 2000, the average composite ACT score for high school students was 21, while homeschool students scored 22.8.

Dr. Lawrence M. Rudner, an expert in quantitative analysis and one who has studied the performance of homeschoolers, once remarked that this move to make homeschoolers meet public school standards was "odd" given the superior academic performance of homeschoolers.

Rudner conducted a study in 1998 that included 20,760 students in 11,930 familes. He found that in every subject and at every grade level (K-12), "home school students scored significantly higher than their public and private school counterparts." Some 25 percent of all home school students at that time were enrolled at a grade level or more beyond that dictated by their age. According to the study, the average eighth grade homeschooler was performing four grade levels above the national average.

[/ QUOTE ]

more here (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/dl20030618.shtml)

[Westbrook]

When it comes to school,
There's no place like home.

[Radical-Conservative]

[ QUOTE ]
Westbrook said:
When it comes to school,
There's no place like home.


[/ QUOTE ] http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yeahthat.gif

[Longhorn_Platinum]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yeahthat.gif

[Chris]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yeahthat.gif & http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yeahthat.gif & http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yeahthat.gif

[ponch21]

Give me a break.

Little lesson on statistics. Average is the sum of the total responses divided by the number of responses. The great thing about public education(sarcasm) is that we GET to test all students. You know those students who have parents who tell them, "Just get a D. All you need to do is pass." These same parents allow their children to smoke, drink alcohol, and consume other drugs. Most often because they are doing the same thing. That brings down the average of our scores. We have Merit scholars, kids that score in the 30s on the ACT, etc.

I have all the respect in the world for home school parents. I appreciate the concern for their kids' education.

However, I think that it is an attempt to "protect" them from ideas that mom and dad disagree with. Homeschooling is a political and social decision IMO, not a decision about quality of education.

Of course I teach in MN, and attended public school in a suburban Wisconsin city. My experience in public education may very well be skewed. I understand that.

[Timberwolf]

Hey ponch...long time no "see"!

Quite honestly, you're likely right. Here in the upper midwest, we don't have the crap going on in our PS to which the others refer...yet. But, you can bet your bottom dollar that it is, indeed, headed our way.

I cringe when I read some of what goes on in the larger cities/more liberal school districts. I find myself thinking, "damn, if that EVER happened here, there would likely be public executions of the school board." I don't think I'm too far off the mark with that thought either.

Don't be such a stranger.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Give me a break.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif <font color="blue">An arm, or a leg?</font>

[ QUOTE ]
However, I think that it is an attempt to "protect" them from ideas that mom and dad disagree with. Homeschooling is a political and social decision IMO, not a decision about quality of education.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif [b]<font color="blue">Not. I get so tired of hearing the public "school" apologists making these spurious claims. I plan to homeschool my own son, because the academics in the public "schools" suck. Many people feel this way. I don't want Xane in a public "school", because teachers give inflated grades to creäte an appearance of success, &amp; I don't want that for my child.</font>

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
However, I think that it is an attempt to "protect" them from ideas that mom and dad disagree with.

[/ QUOTE ]

They wouldn't be doing so much better in the testing compared to the PS kids if those "ideas" you speak of were really of academic importance.


[ QUOTE ]
Homeschooling is a political and social decision IMO, not a decision about quality of education.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's social and about quality. The political argument is bogus. If it's political at all, it's because both sides are rarely presented anymore in the PS. Quality doesn't come with half-truths. It's not the homeschoolers that are afraid of opposing views. They just want equal time, and private schools and homeschooling are the only place to get that anymore. Like I said, they wouldn't do so well in the tests if they weren't getting the whole picture.

My decision to home school was due to my son's request to do it. It is the public school culture in general, the restrictions on much needed discpline, and all the one-sided, agenda driven, useless, crap weighting down the cirriculum, that hurts the learning process and creates an environment that's not constructive.

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

While I admit that public schools can give some students a good education (I was a Merit Scholar and scored in the 99th percentile on the ACT), if I had my whole life to do over again, I would want to "attend" homeschool (possibly a multi-home program).

Why didn't I do this in the first place? My folks didn't have enough money. Both had to work, and that was rare in those days.

That's why I push for vouchers now. I understand what it is like to be raised in one of the lowest income brackets possible.

The truth is that the public "schools" were much, much better when I attended them than they are now. They were still miles behind the private schools, but they hadn't gotten into the "free condoms for all students" mentality at that point. That was still quite a few years in the future.

LP is correct. Teachers hand out As like they are nickels. An A is supposed to mean "superior" or "excellent" not "average".

[ponch21]

Hey TWolf,
Glad to know I am missed. It is good for that male ego of mine. The end of the school year was absolute chaos. I had big community service projects to correct from my Social Problems students and entrepreneurial projects to correct from my Econ students. Then I went to visit my Grandfather in Milwaukee for a week. Even so, I don't have the computer on much during summer - the need to get away is strong after the school year is complete - plus the wife doesn't care for it too much. I will be moving to the town I teach in at the beginning of the month, so I am busy now with the activity of packing.

I will try to visit more often, it is good for me.

[ponch21]

Like I said Chris, I teach in MN and attended school in WI. Public school was and is outstanding in these states. I teach college level classes in my school where the average class size is 15. The kids who go through the school where I teach get good bang for the buck.

Kids I went to HS with scored in the 30s on their ACT, a friend of mine had a perfect score on the math/science portion of the SAT. Kids who want to learn will do so in any environment.

Homeschooling is about protecting their kids from ideas that do not jell with the ones they have been trying to instill.

[Timberwolf]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Like I said Chris, I teach in MN and attended school in WI. Public school was and is outstanding in these states. I teach college level classes in my school where the average class size is 15. The kids who go through the school where I teach get good bang for the buck.

Kids I went to HS with scored in the 30s on their ACT, a friend of mine had a perfect score on the math/science portion of the SAT. Kids who want to learn will do so in any environment.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know you addressed this to Chris, but I have to "chime in".

As I said before, kids in the upper midwest generally do better on those tests b/c they're not subjected to the same kind of crap that kids in the larger, more urban states are.

As for learning in any environment, I must disagree. When the learning environment is constantly disrupted by those that don't care to learn or when a bunch of touchy-feely, politically correct, has nothing to do with learning bullshit is foisted upon our youth, they will not be able to learn.

[ QUOTE ]
Homeschooling is about protecting their kids from ideas that do not jell with the ones they have been trying to instill.

[/ QUOTE ]
While I do agree with this assessment, I believe that it is a secondary concern. I firmly believe that the vast majority of parents that homeschool would NOT do so if their children were being properly EDUCATED (not indoctrinated) by the public school system.

Then again, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

[DoctorDoom]

These items speak volumes.

[ QUOTE ]
Remedial education in basic skill subjects represents one of the largest curriculum areas in the nation’s community colleges. A substantial percentage of students entering almost any community college will find themselves enrolled in one or more remedial courses (McCabe &amp; Day, 1998).

Although remedial courses represent a major curriculum commitment for U.S. community colleges, little data is available to identify the actual numbers of students participating in these courses. Furthermore, relatively few efforts have been made to explore the volume of student participation in various community college remedial courses.

[/ QUOTE ]
Remedial Courses: Estimates of Student Participation and the Volume of Remediation in U.S. Community Colleges (http://www.ncde.appstate.edu/reserve_reading/Remedial_Courses.htm)

[ QUOTE ]
Higher education in Massachusetts threatened to get tough this year with would-be college freshmen like Benjamin Chin. And it has.

Instead of relaxing this summer before his first year at a public four-year college, Mr. Chin spends his days in remedial algebra and English classes at Quinsigamond Community College here.

He knows it's the price he must pay if he's going to attend nearby Worcester State College this fall. Mr. Chin graduated with "decent" grades from high school two weeks ago. But poor SAT scores "threw me away," he says.

Even so, in prior years Worcester State would have accepted him, no questions asked, and allowed him to take remedial courses as a freshman. This year, the school told Chin that before enrolling he must first pass remedial classes.

In Massachusetts, as in many other states, public concern and political rhetoric are heating up over the one-third of all college freshmen nationwide who are taking at least one remedial math, reading, or writing course, according to government surveys.

[/ QUOTE ]
Remedial Ed Loses Ground at Colleges (http://csmweb2.emcweb.com/durable/1998/06/16/p56s1.htm)

[ QUOTE ]
In an effort to reduce the number of students who come to campus needing remedial help in reading, writing, and mathematics skills, the California State University system is pairing with some high schools in the state. CSU faculty members work with high school teachers to ensure that students get the material they need to prepare for college. Included: A description of the Collaborative Academic Preparation Initiative .

California State University (CSU) system officials have found a way to cut down on the number of students who need remedial classes: Help them before they get to campus.

Through CSU's Collaborative Academic Preparation Initiative (CAPI) program, mathematics and English faculty from the CSU system work with high school teachers to develop more effective ways of preparing students for college work.

[/ QUOTE ]
California Colleges, High Schools Collaborate (http://www.education-world.com/a_issues/issues295.shtml)

This illuminates a most unsettling fact: government (public) education is wasting 12 years of the lives of many students and is "graduating" illiterates and innumerates.The concept of remedial ANYTHING at the college level is appalling. A young person who needs to be taught basic skills as a college freshman is a damning indictment of what passes for education.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Timberwolf said:

[ QUOTE ]
Homeschooling is about protecting their kids from ideas that do not jell with the ones they have been trying to instill.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I do agree with this assessment, I believe that it is a secondary concern. I firmly believe that the vast majority of parents that homeschool would NOT do so if their children were being properly EDUCATED (not indoctrinated) by the public school system.

Then again, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

You're pretty much on target TW. Most I know probably would, but don't expect Ponch to understand that, he's obviously swallowed the willfully-blind, liberal line cooked up long ago to obfuscate what's really going on in the PSs.

[Westbrook]

Ponch,

In my case, you are partially correct. Here are our reasons for homeschooling, in order of importance.
Our first order concern is developing in our children a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and a working knowledge of the Bible.

We believe that Scripture plainly admonishes us not to place our children under the authority or tutelege of people who disagree with our Biblical worldview and promote teachings to undermine it. Imagine the mixed message our children would get if we expect them to submit to the authoriy of their teachers while disagreeing with what they are being taught.

We prefer that our children not be subjected to the rampant abuses and even mortal dangers of the modern tax-funded, union-controlled government schools. Yes, we are sheltering our children. That's our job. We don't need to send them out into a blizzard to experience it first hand in order to admonish them of the dangers thereof, either.

We prefer that our children not be exposed to the filthy language, immodest attire, flourishing drug culture, and sexual pressures that permeate the tax-funded, union-controlled government schools in our area.

Lastly, we believe that we can provide for them a better education, in the classical sense of that word. By the time they "graduate" our home to start a family of their own, they will be better read, have a more comprehensive and classical view of history, and be skilled at fundamental mathematics. They will be capable of conducting their own research, compiling their own data, and presenting their own findings with proper syntax, grammar, and spelling. They will be able to read maps and find places on them. They will probably know more than a little Italian and some Russian, too. They will also have skills in dirt farming, animal husbandry, homemaking, fishing, hunting, firearms safety, orienteering, carpentry, mechanics, plumbing, and electrical wiring. They will know very little about swear words, latest fashions, beat music, TV shows, culture idols, sports "heroes", movies, and pop culture in general. They will know all they need to know to retain their abstinence from drugs and premarital sexual adventures. All this, of course, relies completely upon the mercy and grace of God in the name of His precious Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Redeemer.

[Chris]

Well said Westie! http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif

[Westbrook]

Thank you, Chris.

The short of it is that, for us, homeschooling is not an academic issue, it is a 1st Amendment "free exercise" issue.

Superior academic performance and achievment is a side-effect. We consider the academic benefits to be a blessing from God to us for putting Him first in our education efforts.

[TheRealLobo]

Pooch! How ya doin'?

Mrs Lobo and I homeschool our 7 year old.

Not simply a political statement, not simply an academic statement, not simply an economic statement.

All of the above.

Why?

Let's see...I want my son to also learn about Christ, and the private schools around this neck of the woods are non-existant. (Closest is 50 miles away)

I don't think my son should have to be taught to the lowest common denominator in the classroom. He's bright, he's bored with waiting for the slower kids, and boredom causes problems.

I teach my son to "keep his hands to himself", but other parents don't necessarily teach their kids that, and it pisses me off ENORMOUSLY when my son comes home with a bruise on himself. The teacher doesn't see it happen, and my son tries to defend himself and gets in trouble for defending himself/retaliating, but the instigator goes unpunished.

Screw public schools. It makes me feel good to know that they lose money SIMPLY by not being able to report my son on the roles.

To spend 7-8 hours in a building and actually spend two hours per day learning is ludricrous.

I understand that you are probably a VERY fine teacher, and you are likely more the rule than the exception, but for 2 years, my son was in public school. The particular school, and the teachers at said school suck.

At the beginning of this past year, they sent a letter home from the school. It was a "contract" between the parents, the student, the teacher, and the principal.

Under the part the teacher was supposed to sign it said things like "Will empower the children to learn", "Will provide an environment where a child can have self-esteem." yada yada. Notice what is missing? NOWHERE did it say, "Will teach the child math, reading, wrinting...etc".

The child's portion of it had statements including "I will be responsible for all I do."

Tell me, do we hold 7 year old children responsible for all they do?

I wote a letter back to the principal that we don't hold teachers, administrators, criminals, priests, cops, and principals responsible for all their actions, then how could a 7 year old be responsible for their actions when many have no concept of what the consequences of their actions could be?

Yeah, I'll keep on homeschooling my son.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

[ QUOTE ]
TheRealLobo said:
The teacher doesn't see it happen, and my son tries to defend himself and gets in trouble for defending himself/retaliating, but the instigator goes unpunished.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif <font color="blue">Yeah, the old "it doesn't matter who started it" syndrome, where teachers are too lazy to figure out who started it. I hated that, when I was in "school".</font>

[Longhorn_Platinum]

[ QUOTE ]
Westbrook said:
Ponch,

In my case, you are partially correct. Here are our reasons for homeschooling, in order of importance.

[Etc.]

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif

[ponch21]

Hey Loco,
I can't disagree with anything you said about what is wrong with public education. Without a doubt more emphasis needs to be placed on academics. At the elementary school I just wish they would focus on teaching the kids to read and do basic mathematics without the use of a calculator. Everything else is just fluff.

Don't even get me started on self-esteem. Yes, kids need to believe in themselves in order to take the risk of failure. However, we too often tell the kids that the failure is ok. Kids want As and Bs, so we that's what they get. We can't have kids give up, so we make them feel good about themselves.

My main problem with homeschooling is that often times great role models are being taken out of the system. Hard working kids with parents who care are leaving. This doesn't bode well for the society as a whole.

If your ideas and world view are right (no pun intended) then there is nothing to fear about them learning about the other side.

Westy, I respect your decision to keep your kids at home. Your concerns are valid. I am only concerned that your children are going to have a narrow view of the world. How can the religion truely be theirs if it has been forced down their throat 24/7?

[ponch21]

This is a problem with college admissions, not high school education. Not too long ago, only good to elite students went on to college. Now, especially at the community college, anyone who has the money to pay can go. I have had students of mine who either passed with a 60% or failed who are attending college. They are in remedial classes because the college wants their money, but the kid doesn't belong there. If college had some standard of entry, remedial classes would go away.

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a problem with college admissions, not high school education.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, this is a problem with K-12 public education churning out kids who can't read, who can't spell or write a coherent sentence, and who can't do basic math (add, subtract, multiply and divide) without a calculator. Fifty years ago this would have been intolerable. Today it's the norm.

"A high school diploma is not a guarantee that someone can read, write or use basic math skills to an employer's satisfaction. High school is just an interim level of education."
-- Asst. Superintendent Alfredo Stokes, Dougherty County School System, Albany, GA - Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 2/3/95

It's that mindset that is doing an immense disservice to America and to its kids.

[dajoga]

They are in remedial classes because the college wants their money, but the kid doesn't belong there.

Bingo--you nailed it--the college wants their "money." In a sense, that's the same reason PS's hate private, parochial, or home schooling, b/c besides property tax money, they get so much/student from the state so each kid in a non-PS school costs them money. Colleges offer remedial classes to get as many in as possible. I was in HS during the dark ages--'56-'60--and maybe once or twice made the honor roll, but I still got a good enough education that I didn't need any remedial classes (maybe they didn't exist back then) when I went to college. At least I could handle college work well enough to get B's &amp; C's. 'Course, I didn't go to MIT or Stanford. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

[Longhorn_Platinum]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
My main problem with homeschooling is that often times great role models are being taken out of the system. Hard working kids with parents who care are leaving.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif <font color="blue">Well, that's a new twist in the debate, &amp; you're right. But, the solution is for public "schools" to start educating, not for people to keep their kids in "schools" that produce an inferior product. As soon as the public "schools" quit conducting business as usual, &amp; start beïng competitive with their private school &amp; homeschool counterparts, people will look to them to provide their children's education.</font>

[ QUOTE ]
I am only concerned that your children are going to have a narrow view of the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif <font color="blue">You worry too much. They'll be just fine. You're also assuming too much. Specifically, you're assuming that public "schools" automatically provide a broad view of the world, while parents don't.</font>

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Westy, I respect your decision to keep your kids at home. Your concerns are valid. I am only concerned that your children are going to have a narrow view of the world. How can the religion truely be theirs if it has been forced down their throat 24/7?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ponch, your reply doesn't sound too respectful to me.

Whether you like it or not, somebody's religion is going to be "shoved down" my childrens' throats.

The question I have answered by homeschooling them is, "Whose religion shall that be?"

Please consider the following.

By my reckoning, the tax-funded, union-run government school system has achieved the status of established State church for the following reasons.
<ul type="square"> It professes as truths ideologies based on opinion and even blind faith.

It teaches as fact one and only one dogma of origins, when the purveyors of such were not there to observe the processes and have only their presuppositions based on their world-view through which to interpret the data.

It teaches that, for the most part, life is nothing more than a curious side-effect of an uncaring, unknowing cosmos and that when we die we are just so much compost, leading to the conclusion that life has no transcendent or intrinsic meaning.

If there is any spiritual teaching at all, it is based on pagan shamanism. I think it is telling that the biggest holiday in these places is Halloween.

It teaches as facts moral principles based at least in part on the works of people such as eugenicist Margaret Sanger, pedophile Alfred Kinsey, and totalitarian Karl Marx.

The texts used to catechize the children deliberately exclude data that would compromise the State religion's interpretation thereof.

The teaching methods employed were devised by committed social engineers such as John Dewey and Carl Rogers. Such "Affective Education" methods have deteriorated academic outcomes and have demonstrated adverse, even tragic, social consequences. [/list]
By my reckoning, all the above comprise what has become the State Religion purveyed by the tax-funded, union-run government schools.

All of this runs contrary to the religious beliefs of those whose religious faith is other than paganism or "New Age". Yet they are compelled by threat of force to pay to have their children alienated from the faith of their fathers. Even those who do not have any children attending the government schools are compelled by threat of force to support them.

Education is the duty and responsibility of the parents. Home-based and church-based education are demonstrably he best options and served this nation much better than any government school system implemented since the advent of the Prussian public school model or any of its "Progressive" descendents.

If a group of parents wishes to establish or participate in a community-based public school, that is their right. It is not their right, however, to use the threat of force to compel anyone else to participate in it or pay for it, especially if there are philosophical or religious dogmas being purveyed.

[TheRealLobo]

A fine post, worthy of the Hall of Fame.

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif

[Longhorn_Platinum]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon115.gif <font color="blue">I agree. I'd also like to add that the church-state separation wackos would be at a loss to adequately respond to Westbrook's missive. They're more interested in imposing their own narrow worldview on the children of others, while bellyaching about their weird interpretation of the First Amendment.</font>

[Timberwolf]

[ QUOTE ]
All of this runs contrary to the religious beliefs of those whose religious faith is other than paganism or "New Age". Yet they are compelled by threat of force to pay to have their children alienated from the faith of their fathers. Even those who do not have any children attending the government schools are compelled by threat of force to support them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not that this is bad enough, but the state holds one's property hostage to coerce said funding of these indoctrination centers. Just a tad unconstitutional, no??

Great post, Westy!!

[Westbrook]

Thanks, all.

That is an excerpt from a letter I wrote to the "Editors" of all the major newspapers up here in New Hampshire about a year or so back. We have a major fight on our hands here in New Hampshire. The Marxist "judges" in the Supreme Court were able to torture the State's constitution to find a mandate for the State to provide "fair funding" for an "adequate education". The legislature has bent over backwards trying to avoid enacting an income tax. There are counter-lawsuits pending pursuant to that legislation.

A cursory investigation finds that more than a few "non-income-tax" states have undergone roughly the same process in the last 15 years. Wisconsin and Connecticut immediately come to mind. It goes something like this.
<ul type="square"> One or more school districts (euphemisim for "collective") sues the State because the property taxes are not providing "fair funding" for an "adequate education" arguing that it is the State's responsibility to do so.
,
A phalanx of lawyers affiliated with national organizations represent the plaintiff district(s).
,
The state's supreme court suddenly "discovers" a mandate in the state's constitution for the state to provide "fair funding" for an "adequate education", said mandate being obscured somehow for up to 200 years or more without anybody noticing it before.
,
The plaintiffs win.
,
The legislature must act, and the inevitable result is that the state's people are saddled with an income tax. However, the property tax, initially, declines.
,
The property tax soon rises to the unbearable level it was at before the income tax was enacted, and now the people of any given school collective have less control over how much money is to be spent, since the state simply pre-allocates the money before the local school budget process even begins. Does the state ever provide enough money to cover the budget? Of course not. So the rest comes out of the local taxpayers' property taxes, whose franchise has been effectively mitigated.[/list]
If I were a conspiracy nut, I would be inclined to showcase this juggernaut consuming several non-incom-tax states in the last 15 years as key evidence of same.

Here is a little more from the letter I wrote.
<ul type="square">Some of the towns whose tax burdens have been increased by the Statewide Property Tax have demonstrated antipathy to the new redistributionist tax scheme enacted by our state legislature. However, all these towns agree in principle with the prevailing government school paradigm. It is inconsistent to agree with the collectivist government school model while rejecting its inevitable redistributionist tax consequences. Now the courts have ruled the legislature must define what constitutes an adequate education and how to implement fair funding for it. Certainly, this is an invitation to endless litigation, which is what we are beginning to see. Let's consider what the founders of our Constitutional Republic intended.
.
"Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."
~~ Part 1, Article 10, Constitution of the State of New Hampshire
.
Threatening to use the police powers of the State to dispossess a person of his home, the most personal possession one can have next to his very life, for the arbitrary benefit of a government school system, or any other bureaucratic experiment, is clearly a perversion of the ends of government and the manifest endangerment of public liberty. The ends of government are to secure and guarantee the common, inalienable, God-given rights of the people, not to bully them into participating in social experiments. Government cannot grant rights. Only tyrants believe that rights can be granted or rescinded either by edict or by majority. In vigilant defense of this principle, our revolutionary era legislature refused to ratify the federal constitution without a Bill of Rights.
.
The 150-year-old Public School experiment is a failure. No amount of money will be enough to make it workable. Experience with the Public School system has shown that no matter how much money it gets, it is never enough. It is not rational to repeat a process while expecting different results. The government school experiment has gone beyond the point of diminishing returns, not just financially, but academically and ethically as well.
.
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."
~~ Thomas Jefferson[/list]

[TheRealLobo]

WOW!

Westy, I'm glad you're on our side.

[Westbrook]

Lobo, TW, Doc, War, Chris, Wyatt, LongHorn, DesertFox, and others who share my worldview,

I'm glad YOU are on MY side!!!
http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif

I'd just be spitting in the wind if it weren't for y'all.

[MaximumSam]

WB,

It professes as truths ideologies based on opinion and even blind faith.


Such as what? The 'ideology' of geometry?

It teaches as fact one and only one dogma of origins, when the purveyors of such were not there to observe the processes and have only their presuppositions based on their world-view through which to interpret the data.

I'm not aware that schools generally teach any dogma of origin. Biology classes will, of course, cover evolution. Advanced science classes might cover the Big Bang. But these are the dominant theories on how things developed. Evolution is shown every day. But dogma in origins? Sorry, doesn't hold up.

It teaches that, for the most part, life is nothing more than a curious side-effect of an uncaring, unknowing cosmos and that when we die we are just so much compost, leading to the conclusion that life has no transcendent or intrinsic meaning.


Can't say I was ever taught, nor was anyone I know ever taught that.

It teaches as facts moral principles based at least in part on the works of people such as eugenicist Margaret Sanger, pedophile Alfred Kinsey, and totalitarian Karl Marx.

Examples?

The texts used to catechize the children deliberately exclude data that would compromise the State religion's interpretation thereof.

Huh?

The teaching methods employed were devised by committed social engineers such as John Dewey and Carl Rogers. Such "Affective Education" methods have deteriorated academic outcomes and have demonstrated adverse, even tragic, social consequences.

So now public schools should be condemned for trying new teaching methods? Your post simply doesn't add up, WB. You simply throw a few accusations out there, most of them triggered by your animosity towards evolution and science. All right. But students should have an understanding of evolution, and you can still teach them what you think is correct.

[Westbrook]

"Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?"
~~ Job 38:2

[MaximumSam]

"Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?"
~~ Job 38:2

Exactly! How can you claim your children shouldn't be exposed to dominant scientific thought and in the next breathe claim you value knowledge?

[Westbrook]

Sam,

Your response is so pathetic as to hardly deserve a response.

You disparage me as being unscientific. Using your criteria, Isaac Newton was anti-science, since he was a Creationist, too. I am an engineer by trade, so your characterization is pitifully inaccurate. As far as I know, it is not required that one ascribe to the latest pop theories in order to be a scientist.

As for the condition of the schools, their pathetic academic performance, and their religious adhesion to educational techniques long since discredited as ineffective and even destructive, I believe the evidence speaks for itself.

As for the purveying of principles garnered from the likes of Sanger, Kinsey, and Marx, consider that Suzi Landolphi is a popular act in the government schools. At $20,000 a visit, plus books and "materials".

Consider the "Impressions" curriculum, on which the Jaffrey-Rindge school collective, comprised of less than 1500 students K-12, spent almost half a million dollars. The children were told not to tell their parents about it. Unfortunately, one student was so distraught, he showed it to his parents. Lawsuits and acrimony ensued.

Consider the shootings.

There is so much more, but I know that you will not be swayed, so what's the point in presenting it.

Virtually everybody else that read my posts understood EXACTLY what I was talking about.

[MaximumSam]

You disparage me as being unscientific. Using your criteria, Isaac Newton was anti-science, since he was a Creationist, too. I am an engineer by trade, so your characterization is pitifully inaccurate. As far as I know, it is not required that one ascribe to the latest pop theories in order to be a scientist.

I am not labeling you as 'unscientific.' I am simply criticizing your logic. If you think knowledge is important, then why isn't knowledge of dominant scientific thought important. You don't have to 'ascribe' to anything to learn about something. Learning about Islam is obviously important in today's age, but you don't have to worship Allah to learn about Islam.

As for the condition of the schools, their pathetic academic performance, and their religious adhesion to educational techniques long since discredited as ineffective and even destructive, I believe the evidence speaks for itself.

I don't. Schools have to deal with every single kid there is. How many other institutions have to do that? While your choice to homeschool is fine, that hardly means your choice doesn't have consequences. Furthermore, you cannot label every single public school under the same brush. The evidence does speak for itslef - the good students do well, and the poor students don't. Schools can't force kids to do well.

Consider the "Impressions" curriculum, on which the Jaffrey-Rindge school collective, comprised of less than 1500 students K-12, spent almost half a million dollars. The children were told not to tell their parents about it. Unfortunately, one student was so distraught, he showed it to his parents. Lawsuits and acrimony ensued.

I entered "jaffrey-rindge and impressions" into the search engine and got nine responses, none of which had anything to do with lawsuits. Can you elaborate?

Consider the shootings.

There is so much more, but I know that you will not be swayed, so what's the point in presenting it.

Virtually everybody else that read my posts understood EXACTLY what I was talking about.

Of course there is a point in presenting it. This is your children - you should be able to effectively present your points without resorting to falsehoods and sterotypes.

[ponch21]

Westy,
I do respect your choice of religion. I know better than to argue against it. It would be a waste of my time and yours. Neither one of us is going to budge. I am as strongly non-christian as you are Christian.

I just don't want homeschoolers who are taking their kids out of public schools based on religious grounds to hide behind academics. Kids who want to learn and who have parents who know the value of education will thrive in almost any setting.

Are you suggesting that we should eliminate public schools? I am sorry, but this would be disasterous for the United States. Not everyone can afford to stay at home and school their children. The thought of a society without public education is completely outside my paradigm.

As I have said earlier, I teach in rural MN and attended public schools in suburban WI, perhaps my view of p.e. is skewed.

[Timberwolf]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I just don't want homeschoolers who are taking their kids out of public schools based on religious grounds to hide behind academics. Kids who want to learn and who have parents who know the value of education will thrive in almost any setting.

[/ QUOTE ]
They're not hiding behind anything. I'm not that far away from you geographically and the private schools here are a year and a half ahead of the local high schools...and students in our high schools, by NATIONAL standards, kick ass.

As for thriving in any setting, you know not of what you speak. Kids in our communities are quite sheltered from the environs to which the others speak. Make no mistake, those environs will be upon us here in the rural states soon enough.

[ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that we should eliminate public schools?

[/ QUOTE ]
I am. This country would be LEAPS AND BOUNDS ahead of the rest of the world (as it should be and once was) within 5 short years if education were wrested from the government.

[ QUOTE ]
I am sorry, but this would be disasterous for the United States. Not everyone can afford to stay at home and school their children. The thought of a society without public education is completely outside my paradigm.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you paradigm needs shifting. Education has done nothing but suffer under the "tutelage" of the government.

[ QUOTE ]
As I have said earlier, I teach in rural MN and attended public schools in suburban WI, perhaps my view of p.e. is skewed.

[/ QUOTE ]
VERY skewed. Even as good as those schools were/are, they pale in comparison to home schooling/private schooling. Private schools are affordable because of community support. Riverside Christian School here in town has NEVER turned away a student b/c the child's parents couldn't afford the tuition...NOT ONE...and that's a city of around 50,000.

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
If you think knowledge is important, then why isn't knowledge of dominant scientific thought important.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is important to us; as an example of those who, professing to be wise, became fools. In exploring the wonders of our universe, plainly evident in the studies of physics, chemistry, and biology, we regularly demonstrate to our children the self-evident folly of believing that such majestic complexity could come out of nowhere from nothing for no apparent reason.

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
Schools have to deal with every single kid there is. How many other institutions have to do that?

[/ QUOTE ]
You live in the real world, don't you? Do you work? Do you have a job? In the working world, we have to deal with every single kind of person there is. In case you don't already know, I'll let you in on a little secret. if you don't perform, you're out, unless you are a member of a protected "victim" group and can get a clever lawyer to misrepresent the facts enough to convince a clown judge and circus jury that you were fired because of your "victim" status.

Applying this principle to the academic environment, if you don't perform, you should be grouped with others who perform, or not perform as the case may be, at your level. This allows the brighter, more interested students to pursue their studies without the distractions and antics of the class morons. However, this paradigm was abandoned some generations ago, since it might bruise the tender "self-esteem" of the jerks. Result? Lowest-common-denominator education.

When children do well in such institutions, I submit that it is in spite of them, not because of them. Furthermore, there exists a remnant of teachers who still care and are proficient and current in their subject matters. I may be wrong, but I would venture that they are there in spite of the system, not because of it.

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
While your choice to homeschool is fine, that hardly means your choice doesn't have consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed! So far the only bad consequences I've seen in homeschooling is the heavy-handed tactics of the union-controlled state school system, zealous of promoting its worldview, and bloody jealous of its waning monopoly on education.

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
I entered "jaffrey-rindge and impressions" into the search engine and got nine responses, none of which had anything to do with lawsuits. Can you elaborate?


[/ QUOTE ]
Just because you can't find it with your favorite search engine doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I lived in the Jaffrey-RIndge district for 21 years.

If I remember correctly, back around 1992 or 1993, there was a lawsuit filed against the school collective by the parents of the offended child. There may have been more than one set of parents involved.

From what I remember, part of the "Impressions" curriculum involved "Death Education" complete with a field trip to a funeral home, "values clarification" exercises, and exercises in "casting spells". I remember that one assignment involved writing a suicide note, which is what I think prompted the lawsuit. I'm not making this up! There was a series of school board meetings to explain the curriculum. The meetings were heated and many of the residents were enraged that so much money had been spent on teacher "training" and materials for this junk. Others were enraged that this experiment should be foisted upon their children without their consent.

I knew a man who ran for school board because of this episode. A major part of his platform was to rid the district of the "Impressions" curriculum. He was hounded by the local "evil genius" of the ACLU and his campaign was destroyed by the political machine of his opponent. He mysteriously lost his job and, just as mysteriously, became unable to find another job anywhere in the state. He had to work as a contractor in neighboring Massachusetts.

Curiously, the Superintendent resigned at the end of that school year or the next, and the Impressions curriculum was dropped from the district after his departure. I don't know what became of the lawsuit.

[ QUOTE ]
MaximumSam said:
Of course there is a point in presenting it. This is your children - you should be able to effectively present your points without resorting to falsehoods and sterotypes.

[/ QUOTE ]
I do so every year when I report their academic progress to the state, where falsehoods are punishable by law.

I think I made my points sufficiently on the first page of this topic. To summarize for you, since you may not have read it:
<ul type="square">For us homeschooling is a 1st Amendment "free exercise" issue. It has nothing to do with academic excellence. That just happens to be a welcome byproduct of our efforts, which we believe to be the blessing of God for our sincere attempts to obey His commandments in this area of our lives.[/list]

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Westy,
I do respect your choice of religion. I know better than to argue against it. It would be a waste of my time and yours. Neither one of us is going to budge. I am as strongly non-christian as you are Christian.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, thank you, Ponch.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I just don't want homeschoolers who are taking their kids out of public schools based on religious grounds to hide behind academics. Kids who want to learn and who have parents who know the value of education will thrive in almost any setting.


[/ QUOTE ]
As you know from my posts, our reasons for homeschooling have little to do with academics, though it has proven to be a nice side benefit.

But consider that if "children who want to learn and who have parents who know the value of education will thrive in almost any setting", how much better will be their experience and performance if that setting is optimized? And what greater optimization can there be than to have a loving family environment where individual attention can so much more easily be provided?

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Are you suggesting that we should eliminate public schools? I am sorry, but this would be disasterous for the United States. Not everyone can afford to stay at home and school their children. The thought of a society without public education is completely outside my paradigm.

[/ QUOTE ]
"Public Schools" as they exist today should be eliminated, yes. By my reckoning, they are really thinly veiled religious institutions promoting a worldview that is antithetical, even hostile, to those who do not share the same worldview. Why, then, should those who do not share that vision be compelled to pay for its promotion?

It would be far better if parents who share a certain worldview, or who have enough in common not to mind minor differences in their views, could pool their resources to educate their own children without putting a gun to my head to force me to pay for it.

Rather than being disastrous, this could actually be a HUGE blessing for this country.
<ul type="square"> More mothers would have to stay at home, so there would be fewer children left in "day-care" (ugh!) or left to roam the streets after school.

Family life would have to be simplified. Many families would have to eliminate extravagances such as video games, satellite and cable TV services, and all that expensive, unhealthy junk food.

Parents would have to retain or re-learn all the stuff they were supposed to have learned in the 12 or more years they were formally educated, thereby making their brains work rather than anesthetizing them in front of a 60 Hz screen flashing "entertainment" at them. This would result in an overall better educated society and would likely enhance the parents' performance at their workplaces.

Parents would have to spend more time with their children, and children would be spending a lot less time without parental supervision.

Children would not have to be bussed for hours each day to the big school collective many miles away in some other town, losing precious time that could be applied to their educational pursuits or physical activity outdoors.

Children would be better socialized in an environment where there are children and adults of varying ages, rather than the silly, unrealistic Prussian age-segregated model foisted on us by Horace Mann some 150 years ago.

With millions of families foregoing the purchases of all that entertainment junk, the national deficit would decline, as would the average family debt.

With more mothers staying at home, there is more work available for the fathers.

Taxes to support the government schools would be eliminated, fostering a growth in the economy by people more likely to spend on investing in venture capital and other job-creating endeavors. [/list]
I could probably think of more, but I've gotta get some rest.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Westbrook said:
I could probably think of more, but I've gotta get some rest.


[/ QUOTE ]

After he reads that, so will ponch! http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

[ponch21]

Westy,
Just when I think you can't amaze me any more you go and drop one like this.

To be honest, you make some great points. My wife is putting her career on hold so that she can stay at home with our boys. However, when they are of school age, they will attend the local public school.

You and I actually agree on much here. I agree we can do better with less consumption. I believe so because of environmental and family reasons. However, if we consumed less it would be devastating to the U.S. economy. GDP=C(consumer spending)+I(investment spending)+G(government spending)

Yet, we still disagree on much:"With more mothers staying at home, there is more work available for the fathers." Yikes!!! Maybe we should stop offering jobs to minorities as well. More work would be available to white fathers then. I want the best person in any given occupation, not the best man. Quality of life in this country is higher because of women who choose to work.

[Timberwolf]

*twist* *twist* *twist*

Geez, ponch...do ya think you could twist and knot what Westy said any more than you just did?

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Westy,
Just when I think you can't amaze me any more you go and drop one like this. To be honest, you make some great points.

[/ QUOTE ]
Glad to be of service!
http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
My wife is putting her career on hold so that she can stay at home with our boys. However, when they are of school age, they will attend the local public school.

[/ QUOTE ]
My condolences. Really, I mean that.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
However, if we consumed less it would be devastating to the U.S. economy. GDP=C(consumer spending)+I(investment spending)+G(government spending)

[/ QUOTE ]
It might be devastating to the Korean, Chinese, or Taiwanese economies, since that's where most of the "entertainment" electronics junk originates. And it may put a crimp on the credit card usurers. Some satellite and cable companies may go feet up. It may also be devastating to the fast food troughs, such as MacDonalds and Burger Barf, etc, which may further impact the "burger beef" economies of such bastions of liberty as Brazil, Venezuela, and Columbia.

But large swathes of the U.S. economy would benefit greatly. There would be a greater demand for whole foods for real home-cooking, instead of the pasty, pre-processed cruft most Americans ingest now. There would be greater demand for fruit, which, even now, is still less expensive than candy and chips and soda. Whole foods are better the closer they are to the source, so there would have to be more grown locally. And with the demise of much of the massive government bureaucracy, just think of all the government workers that would have to return to productive work, like homemaking and construction. Have you tried to contract a plumber, electrician or carpenter lately?

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Yet, we still disagree on much:"With more mothers staying at home, there is more work available for the fathers." Yikes!!! Maybe we should stop offering jobs to minorities as well. More work would be available to white fathers then. I want the best person in any given occupation, not the best man. Quality of life in this country is higher because of women who choose to work.

[/ QUOTE ]
I musta missed something. Where did I say "White" fathers?

I'll let you in on a little secret.

Back before the "Great Society" when most mothers worked at being keepers at home, the average composite tax rate in the U.S, federal, state, and municipal, was about 5% (1955).

Since Mama left home to go to work in the cultural upheaval that followed the "Great Society", the composite tax rate has gone up to around 41% (1998). If I remember correctly, 1998 was the year in which, here in the U.S, the number of people working for the government exceeded the number of people working in manufacturing.

Here's the secret.
<ul type="square">They are getting your wife for free while your children are being supervised and raised by strangers. [/list]
See, your wife's income is probably just barely enough to pay the taxes required for all those wonderful social programs, such as massive, distant, uncontrollable school collectives, "bussing programs", "day-care" centers, "head-start", after-school "programs", and other socialist silliness.

Great bargain, that, eh?

Ponch, you and I certainly have a different vision of family, education, society, and culture and the roles of government therewith.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon115.gif <font color="blue">Gee, Westbrook, I'm glad you're on our side. I had thought about copying &amp; pasting one of your earliër posts, to exhibit in the Hall of Fame forum, but I think I'll wait until this thread has run its course, then move the whole thing.</font>

[Westbrook]

I missed this one.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Quality of life in this country is higher because of women who choose to work.

[/ QUOTE ]
Try telling that to the children who come out of the "schools" each day to be dropped off at the "day-care" or left to fend for themselves.

When I came home from school, Ma was there with a hot snack for us before we went out skating or sledding. And when Dad came home, it meant a fresh-cooked, hot meal was on its way to the table.

It's still like that for my children, except it's even better, since they're with Mama all day, and on the days I work at home, they have me there, too. Other families often come to visit, whereupon we'll have fellowship around dinner followed by hymn sings. It's a blessing.

[TheRealLobo]

Shoot, most of it is suitable for framing.

I will be printing the entire thread for Mrs Lobo to read at her leisure.

She's doing MOST of the homeschool work right now.

She ROCKS!

Westy...you're doing the right thing. I know you don't need validation by me, but I want to offset any misgivings you might have from the "dark side".

[ponch21]

I jumped into this thread because of the claim that homeschoolers do it better. As it always does, the thread has changed directions. Westy, keep on keepin on. You are obviously an intelligent individual. Because of your strong religious views, homeschooling is right for you.

I have no such hang-ups. I have no "religion" to speak of. I can't wait for my sons to learn at my school district. I am proud of the education we provide the people of my town. That said, we will be doing our own supplemental education as well. Education isn't just something that happens at a school. I consider much of how we interact - and hopefully continue to interact far into the future - to be a form of schooling.

My son loved daycare when we took him there. He had playmates and a woman who cared for him. That said, I know he loves being home with mom (and me for the summer) even more. I am fairly certain that he is not going to be ruined because of it. I was a latch key kid back in the day. We had chores that had to be done, homework to finish, and dinner to cook. Can't say that it ruined me, it actually made me a pretty good cook.

Why can't two income families cook whole food meals? We did it all the time. Especially when my wife went vegatarian on me. Not many prepackaged vegatarian meals out there. We have people over for dinner too, only we don't sing hymns and pray together. All of life is a blessing. You live it your way, I will live it mine. I enjoy most of the progress we have enjoyed as a culture. I too believe in the first amendment, and the less religion we have forced down our throats, the happier I am.

[ponch21]

"It might be devastating to the Korean, Chinese, or Taiwanese economies, since that's where most of the "entertainment" electronics junk originates. And it may put a crimp on the credit card usurers. Some satellite and cable companies may go feet up. It may also be devastating to the fast food troughs, such as MacDonalds and Burger Barf, etc, which may further impact the "burger beef" economies of such bastions of liberty as Brazil, Venezuela, and Columbia.

But large swathes of the U.S. economy would benefit greatly. There would be a greater demand for whole foods for real home-cooking, instead of the pasty, pre-processed cruft most Americans ingest now. There would be greater demand for fruit, which, even now, is still less expensive than candy and chips and soda. Whole foods are better the closer they are to the source, so there would have to be more grown locally. And with the demise of much of the massive government bureaucracy, just think of all the government workers that would have to return to productive work, like homemaking and construction. Have you tried to contract a plumber, electrician or carpenter lately?"

Yikes! Stick to what you know Westy. Religion and bible quotes yes. Macroeconomics no.

So you would like us to go back to our agrarian roots, and women should exit the workforce? You are a case study on reactionary politics.

I mean that with all due respect. I think you are a great guy with amazing conviction in your beliefs.

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
So you would like us to go back to our agrarian roots, and women should exit the workforce? You are a case study on reactionary politics.

I mean that with all due respect. I think you are a great guy with amazing conviction in your beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon126.gif
Sort of a backhanded compliment, eh?

Call it reactionary if you will. I call it sensible.
http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

But as far as I'm concerned, y'all can live as you like, as long as you don't try to stop me and mine from living as we like.

Or force me to pay for you to live as you like.

That's the main problem I have with "public" schools.

I submit that, ultimately, all education is religious, because there is no way to keep transcendent thought out of it. Ultimately, questions concerning origins and destinies and morality arise.

And what answers are given?

Thomas Jefferson said:
<ul type="square">"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." [/list]I am being forced to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which I disbelieve and abhor. If I refuse to pay, I will be disposessed of my home. By force.

This is tyranny.

Ponch, you said,
<ul type="square">"I too believe in the first amendment, and the less religion we have forced down our throats, the happier I am." [/list] It is inconsistent for you to say this while you believe it's perfectly alright that I am compelled to pay by threat of force for you to educate your children and for the promotion of what has become the state religion of Humanism in its various denominations: pagan, atheist, agnostic, spiritist, etc.

Teachings on origins, destinies, and morals are inherently religious and cannot fall within the scope of tax-funded institutions without a First Amendment violation. Forcing people to pay for the promotion of one worldview over others only serves to exacerbate the divisions inherent in a society as diverse as ours has become.

On the one hand, as long as the government schools persist in favoring one set of theories and philosophies over another, even presenting said theories and philosophies as facts, they venture into the religious realm. One may teach about these things, but impartiality and respect for differing perspectives must be part of the mix. This is definitely not the case in any tax-funded school system in New Hampshire.

On the other hand, a values-neutral education is not only impossible; it's not even desirable. To educate children without imparting to them any intrinsic purpose for life, or any moral compass, or any sense of justice is not only negligent, but dangerous.

I submit that if public funding is to be provided at all, it should be given directly to the parents, the only requirement being that the money be spent for educational purposes, that they may choose for their own children the education that most closely reflects their own worldview. In a society as diverse as ours, a truly Public Education with its attendant government-mandated funding of government-mandated positions on origins, destinies, and morals can only be tyrannical.

[Timberwolf]

Man, I certainly hope this thread remains a permanent fixture in the archives.

I will restate what has already been said, Westy...I'm glad you're on OUR side!!

[DesertFox]

This (http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Number=183252&amp;page=0&amp;view=collap sed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=1&amp;vc=&amp;PHPSESSID=) thread has other aspects of the debate.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif <font color="blue">Another thing I'd like to add. Today, I was talking to the lifeguard at the pool, who just graduated from a public "school", &amp; he was telling me about the spring trip that the band takes every year. This year, they went to South Padre Island, &amp; it shouldn't take a genius to figure out what will happen when you take over a hundred teenagers to the beach in May, &amp; let them stay a whole weekend. In addition to kids sneaking out of the motel to have sex on the beach (not the mixed drink), there were also drugs &amp; alcohol. The brilliant individual who thought up the ideä to make this trip works in a public "school", &amp; even though the kids had to raise some of the money for themselves, they went on this trip in busses owned by the "school" district, &amp; this was a function approved of by our local "school" board. This is just another reason why so many people hate beïng forced to pay for public "schools".</font>

[dajoga]

Ponch wrote--I do respect your choice of religion. I know better than to argue against it. It would be a waste of my time and yours. Neither one of us is going to budge. I am as strongly non-christian as you are Christian.

To be honest, you make some great points. My wife is putting her career on hold so that she can stay at home with our boys. However, when they are of school age, they will attend the local public school.

Sorry to butt in here b/c I'm enjoying the twist that this thread has taken, but ponch you obviously have your boys best interests in mind, so what will be their eternal destiny if you give them a good education but raise them "strongly non-Christian?"
Now if the Bible's just another religious book, then you and your family are safe, but if it's the eternal Word of God, as it claims, then what?

[TheRealLobo]

Ponch21 said:

"I too believe in the first amendment, and the less religion we have forced down our throats, the happier I am"

I too believe in the Constitution, and the less government we have forced down our throats, the happier I am.

BTW Ponch, ummm, where EXACTLY is religion being "forced down" your throats?

[DoctorDoom]

To the unbeliever, any mention of faith or religion is forcing it down his throat. I had a flyer from the American Humanist Association that listed many religious "offenses" and how to respond to them, such as someone saying "Merry Christmas!" or "God bless you!" when they sneeze. It would have made a wonderful parody had it not been composed with total seriousness.

Unbelievers look for opportunities to be "offended" so that they can whine and wail and bitch and use the courts to force their POV on society as a whole. To the unbeliever, there is a "right" to be shielded from the manifestations of faith. Sadly, the courts have decreed that the "right" of one carping atheist to be spared the traumatic experience of seeing a creche or the Ten Commandments, or hearing "God bless you!" supercedes the rights of millions of people of faith to enjoy the free exercise of their religion.

When a teacher silently reading her Bible during the class reading period, or a child handing out Christian valentine cards, constitutes Congress making a law respecting an establishment of religion, we may safely conclude that the lunatics are running the asylum.

[DesertFox]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yeahthat.gif

[dajoga]

Ditto

[rbisrb2]

There is only one reason that "atheists" protest so much. It is because they know they are wrong and hate it when God makes himself known to them. They have a problem, even if every Christian was to die and every Bible burned, He still will make himself known through his Power in the order of nature. He still will make himself known by the beauty of nature (there is NO reason for beauty, for pleasing scents, for breathtaking vista's, for constellations in the heavens which declare God's gospel, (Leo the lion showing Jesus as the Lion of Judah, Aquarius showing the water of the word of God, the souther cross, showing the cross on which mankind placed the Son of God to die for our sins, the Sun representing the Sun of Righteousness or the Son of Righteousness and the Moon that shows the Christians reflection of Christ's righteousness, etc.) and that show the seasons.
No matter if you shut the mouths of Christians, the rocks will cry out about God creating the animals that are contained in them!

!

[TheRealLobo]

[ QUOTE ]
DoctorDoom said:
To the unbeliever, any mention of faith or religion is forcing it down his throat. I had a flyer from the American Humanist Association that listed many religious "offenses" and how to respond to them, such as someone saying "Merry Christmas!" or "God bless you!" when they sneeze....the lunatics are running the asylum.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree Doc, but, I want to see ponch21's reply.

I would like for him to show me where it's being done.

[Westbrook]

Lobo, I can tell you where it's being done.

I am compelled by threat of force to pay for the education of Ponch's children while he and his wife pursue their careers.

Even worse, the education for which I am compelled to pay by threat of force is hostile to my own beliefs concerning origins, destinies, and morals.

So while I am "allowed" to school my children outside of their perverted paradigm, I am still compelled by threat of force to pay for something that I cannot use, for reasons of conscience.

While my wife and I have decided to make the sacrifices necessary to educate our own children, Ponch and his wife, who represent the "majority", can exploit our sacrifice, since we are compelled to share the burden for educating their children, as they go about accumulating wealth or prestige or whatever other worldliness is fulfilled by pursuing two careers in one household.

And if we dare to pray over our food in a restaurant in the presence of Ponch and his family, we will be accused of shoving our religion down their throats.

Don't get me wrong. I do not resent Ponch and the millions he represents, nor am I bitter against them.

I only wish to expose their "theater of the absurd" hypocrisy.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I do respect your choice of religion. I know better than to argue against it. It would be a waste of my time and yours. Neither one of us is going to budge. I am as strongly non-christian as you are Christian.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you were the one complaining because you think that homeschoolers were only getting one side of things. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif It’s the PSs that have eliminated all input but their humanist view. You can't eliminate Christianity from our education, without editing out most of our history.


[ QUOTE ]
I just don't want homeschoolers who are taking their kids out of public schools based on religious grounds to hide behind academics.

[/ QUOTE ]

It’s the PSs that are hiding the promotion of humanism behind their so-called academics. That’s why they have such a desperate need to revise history.


[ QUOTE ]
You live it your way, I will live it mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine. Just don’t whine to us when reality bites your butt. We've already been forced to paid enough for your twisted one. And, remember you said that next time to you go to say "I just don't want" about what other people teach their kids.

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
Westbrook said:
And if we dare to pray over our food in a restaurant in the presence of Ponch and his family, we will be accused of shoving our religion down their throats.

[/ QUOTE ]
I forgot to add that, while the "free exercise" of religion is being assailed on every front, including the governmental and cultural discouragement of public prayer and the state encroachment on free speech in the pulpit by limiting the "allowable" preaching topics, every public display of blasphemy, pornography, and lewd conduct is protected as "free speech".

[DoctorDoom]

"It is, by now, a scandal beyond irony that thanks to the energetic litigation of 'civil liberties' fanatics, pornographers enjoy expansive First Amendment protection while first graders in a nativity play are said to violate First Amendment values."
-- George Will

"Though crude, pornography is a philosophical statement. It says: there are no rules about sex; sex is trivial; sex is for entertainment. Though debased, pornography is a theological statement. It says: there is no God who says I should limit my lust or channel my passion or give as well as get... Pornography is anti-woman and anti-child. it is anti-marriage and anti-permanence. Thus it is profoundly anti-civilization. Since civilization is social support to the dynamics of life, pornography is anti-life."
-- William Stanmeyer

"'You don't have to read it.' 'You can switch it off if you are offended.' These and other cliches... have been used to justify a situation where the tastes of a small minority have progressively infused the whole culture. On the assumption that no one's freedom is thereby impaired, violence and obscenity fill the media, despite the fact that this material does not reflect the choice of the average adult."
-- John H. Court

[ponch21]

Hey Loco,
It is happening all over the place. Christians believe that their way of thinking is the only way of thinking. They want the 10 commandments posted on school walls. They want prayer in schools. We have to now say the pledge of allegiance at least once a week. I don't want Christianity shoved down my kids' throats. Religion is a personal matter best left to family and church. The institution of education is not responsible for this aspect of upbrining.

I live and teach in a small midwestern town that is dominated by conservative Christians. Many of them are close friends of mine. However, their faith affects all of us in the community and school. Every year the community has a "Grad Blast" where graduating seniors stay over night at the school and have a sober party on graduation night. We cannot have a hypnotist perform at this event because the Baptists in town believe that hypnotism lets in demons. Fun, safe entertainment is withheld from everyone because some people have wacky ideas.

[Westbrook]

Ponch, your bigotry is breathtaking.

Not to mention your ignorance.

To paraphrase the Doc, I would have thought it a parody if I didn't think you were serious.

I surmise that a "Grad Blast" consisting of a booze-and-sex-party with strippers and porno videos would be more to your liking.

Let me ask you something.
Are the 10 Commandments posted anywhere in a tax-funded, union-run government school in your "district"?

Do any of your tax-funded, union-run government schools start their day with prayer, or even a "moment of silence"?

Are blasphemy, pornography, and lewd conduct protected "speech" in your district?
I venture that the answer to the first two questions is a thunderous NO while the answer to the third question is a resounding YES.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Hey Loco,...

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif <font color="blue">There's nobody here by that name.</font>

[ QUOTE ]
We cannot have a hypnotist perform at this event because the Baptists in town believe that hypnotism lets in demons. Fun, safe entertainment is withheld from everyone because some people have wacky ideas.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/serious.gif <font color="blue">Activities that involve dabbling in the occult might be fun to some, but they are definitely not safe. You don't want religion shoved down your throat, but whine when others don't want exposure to an activity that offends them.</font>

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
It is happening all over the place. Christians believe that their way of thinking is the only way of thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or could it be that they don't want their children indoctrinated in YOUR way of thinking?

[ QUOTE ]
They want the 10 commandments posted on school walls. They want prayer in schools. We have to now say the pledge of allegiance at least once a week.

[/ QUOTE ]
I admit that to the average liberal, those things are ee-vill far beyond the vilest forms of pornography. I'm aware that the libs would infinitely rather see "Heather Has Two Mommies" and "Uncle Jim Gives Daddy A Blow Job" in the classrooms than the Bible. But, let me ask a question. Which environment would you prefer for kids?

A: the schools of yesteryear that opened with prayer, and the worst problems were talking in line and chewing gum in class.

B: the schools of today where God has been utterly banned, moral relativism is the M.O., the kids pass through metal detectors to enter the building, drugs are distributed in the halls, teachers have little if any respect, students live in fear of being beaten to a pulp or killed for their name-brand sneakers, and the "graduates" can't read or write a coherent sentence.

Yes, there are exceptions, but when I was in school a LO-O-ONG time ago, the exceptions were the schools that today are the majority. There was no such thing as grading on a curve or social promotions or dumbing down courses and tests for the sake of the lowest achievers. No one whined about cultural effects on learning abilities and racially biased exams.

And, the teachers demanded and received respect from the students. If Mr. Jones sent home a note about Johnny's behavior, Johnny damned well delivered the note and faced the wrath of mom and dad. Today, if Johnny stands on his desk and yells "F**K YOU, MR. JONES!" and Mr. Jones asks him to please sit down, he, not Johnny, faces the wrath of mom and the latest dad, and probably the school administration.

IMO, there is no coincidence involved in the removal of God from the public schools and their subsequent descent into chaos.

[Wyatt_Junker]

[ QUOTE ]
If Mr. Jones sent home a note about Johnny's behavior, Johnny damned well delivered the note and faced the wrath of mom and dad. Today, if Johnny stands on his desk and yells "F**K YOU, MR. JONES!" and Mr. Jones asks him to please sit down, he, not Johnny, faces the wrath of mom and the latest dad, and probably the school administration.


[/ QUOTE ]

And then Mr. Jones gets turned into a pinata because he's white and Johnny's black. And then you start hearing Coolio's Gangster's Paradise played by an orchestra in the background while Johnny's parents beat your ass, "Kick him again Johnny!" "Go for the ribs." Meanwhile Mr. Jones is in the fetal position on the floor, clutching a chalkboard eraser, blood trickling out his nose and his clip-on tie yanked out just a few feet adjacent to him. Then, the principal peeks in, and shouts to Johnny, "Kick him again!"

[TheRealLobo]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Hey Loco,
It is happening all over the place. Christians believe that their way of thinking is the only way of thinking. They want the 10 commandments posted on school walls.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll say the same thing that libs said about the faggot artist. "If you don't like it...don't look at it."

[ QUOTE ]
They want prayer in schools. We have to now say the pledge of allegiance at least once a week.

[/ QUOTE ]

We said the Pledge of Allegiance EVERY DAY (horror of horrors) when I was in grade school. I didn't realize it would warp me so badly.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't want Christianity shoved down my kids' throats.

[/ QUOTE ]

Up above, you stated (and I paraphrase) that if I raised my son properly, I shouldn't have anything to worry about. Are you afraid that your children might pick up a bible some day?

[ QUOTE ]
Religion is a personal matter best left to family and church. The institution of education is not responsible for this aspect of upbrining.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since WHEN? The nanny state has directed schools to provide free breakfasts, free lunches, and wants schools to start indoctrinating children at earlier and earlier ages. You need to read some impartial information about Horace Mann before you make a comment like the above.

Hmmm, after re-reading your statement above, I glossed over the phrase "this aspect". I'll change tack here. What aspect of "upbringing" is the "institution of education" responsible for? Schools SHOULD be there to educate...NOTHING else. Not editorialize, not opine, not twist, not revise, but to provide FACTS.

[ QUOTE ]
I live and teach in a small midwestern town that is dominated by conservative Christians. Many of them are close friends of mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bet THAT sticks in your craw.

[ QUOTE ]
However, their faith affects all of us in the community and school.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why shouldn't it? Shouldn't they have a say in what happens in their community too? Or should only the few "non-Christians" be the ones dictating what happens in the town?

[ QUOTE ]
Every year the community has a "Grad Blast" where graduating seniors stay over night at the school and have a sober party on graduation night. We cannot have a hypnotist perform at this event because the Baptists in town believe that hypnotism lets in demons.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, you can have your hypnotist, as long as the Baptists can have a missionary come and share the word with the kids too. We won't make him a minister or anything...just a simple layman missionary.

[ QUOTE ]
Fun, safe entertainment is withheld from everyone because some people have wacky ideas.

[/ QUOTE ]

The word of the majority in the community is withheld from everyone because some people have wacky ideas.

to Longhorn Platinum...It's okay...he calls me Loco, and I call him pooch most of the time, but thanks for watching out for me bro'.

[TheRealLobo]

Oh pooch, one other thing.

The phrase "shoving (insert what one finds detestable here) down my throat".

I'd like to address that.

I find the homosexual agenda deplorable, and feel that they are "shoving acceptance of homosexuality down my throat" by parading around demanding special rights.

Do you feel the same way about Christianity? Perhaps it's only the things you disagree with that you feel that about.

How can one say that the posting of the Ten Commandments on a wall is less acceptable than two fat old queens running around in tutus in public?

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
How can one say that the posting of the Ten Commandments on a wall is less acceptable than two fat old queens running around in tutus in public?

[/ QUOTE ]
Or addressing a school assembly about tolerance and understanding of the queer "lifestyle".

[ponch21]

[ QUOTE ]
Westbrook said:
Ponch, your bigotry is breathtaking.

Not to mention your ignorance.

To paraphrase the Doc, I would have thought it a parody if I didn't think you were serious.

I surmise that a "Grad Blast" consisting of a booze-and-sex-party with strippers and porno videos would be more to your liking.

Let me ask you something.
<ul type="square"> Are the 10 Commandments posted anywhere in a tax-funded, union-run government school in your "district"?

Do any of your tax-funded, union-run government schools start their day with prayer, or even a "moment of silence"?

Are blasphemy, pornography, and lewd conduct protected "speech" in your district?[/list]
I venture that the answer to the first two questions is a thunderous NO while the answer to the third question is a resounding YES.


[/ QUOTE ]


I am a bigot because I don't want Christianity in public schools? I have seen far worse bigotry on this board that what I posted.

I am an active participant in the Grad Blast every year. I lecture my students relentlessly on the idiocy of alcohol use and premarital sex. My concern is with the Christians dictating what can be done at the Grad Blast. No hypnotist, no faux gambling... Because I don't worship a black book doesn't mean I am without morals. I have tried my best to have a high minded debate Westy. It doesn't seem very Christain of you to be so derogatory.

As for your list of questions, 10 Commandments are not posted, but would be if up to Christians. No we do not start our day with prayer, but we would if it was up to Christians. Kids can pray whenever they want. Your third question doesn't go with your first two. Perfect example of flawed logic. Pornography and lewd conduct is not protected speech in my district. They might be outside the school walls, but not within.

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
DoctorDoom said:
[ QUOTE ]
How can one say that the posting of the Ten Commandments on a wall is less acceptable than two fat old queens running around in tutus in public?

[/ QUOTE ]
Or addressing a school assembly about tolerance and understanding of the queer "lifestyle".

[/ QUOTE ]
Or presenting the lurid details of that lifestyle to an assembly of 12-to-16 year olds, as they did in Massachusetts last year. It was an off-campus event, sponsored by the tax-funded school, employing tax-funded school busses, tax-funded teachers as chaperones, and using tax funds for the rental of the seminar space, using tax funds to pay the seminar "facilitators" and using tax-funds to pay for their materials, lodging, and other expenses.

Among the subjects discussed in detail were how-tos on "fisting", anal and oral copulation, golden showers, etc. I don't remember if they discussed "gerbilling". Leaflets and pamphlets and books from queer activist organizations were presented at display tables. Unfortunately for the queers and their friends in the tax-funded, union-run school collective, one of the attendees had a tape recorder and shared the proceedings with his parents.

There was an outraged response from the parents, but did you hear about it in the news?

I didn't think so.

Just imagine the nation-wide opprobrium from the big news networks if the funds were used to bus the school children to a Gospel presentation by a Christian missionary.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I lecture my students relentlessly on the idiocy of alcohol use and premarital sex.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/um.gif <font color="blue">Wow, maybe the band director at my former "school" should take you along on his next spring trip to the beach. Better still, maybe you should quit wasting your time lecturing the kids, &amp; lecture the admin &amp; the "school" board for sponsoring such trips.</font>

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
Or presenting the lurid details of that lifestyle to an assembly of 12-to-16 year olds, as they did in Massachusetts last year.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's "Fistgate". It's an annual event.

[ QUOTE ]
The people who brought us Fistgate three years ago, GLSEN, were back at Tufts again this year on Saturday, March 15, for their 13th annual conference.

Although the focus has changed somewhat. the object is still to normalize homosexuality in the schools, beginning in preschool and kindergarten.

According to one educator who has attended previous GLSEN Boston conferences, "In past years the emphasis was on children and sex. This year's conference appeared to be geared more toward teachers and a 'stealth' agenda that took the focus off sex in favor of more subtle methods, using 'gay allies' to continue the homosexual agenda in schools."

A recurring conference theme was "Identity politics," based on the belief that homosexuality is an innate, immutable characteristic ("who I am"), rather than a chosen, controllable behavior.

Security was tight on the 150-year-old campus with armed guards stationed at all conference areas, including Dewick Dining Hall at lunchtime. The paranoid atmosphere was enhanced by a disclaimer in the official program book that prohibited the use of recording devices "in all conference facilities" and permitted no photographs to be taken "unless consent has been given by all those being pictured." Although it was announced that protesters were outside and attendees were told to ignore them, none were seen.

[snip]

The conference concluded with the off-Broadway comedy, Santa Claus is Coming Out, performed by Jeffrey Solomon. In it, a young boy named Gary writes to Santa asking for a Brenda Ann doll for Christmas, but Santa brings him a truck instead. The next year, Gary asks for a "Dream Date Norm" doll, but Santa fails to deliver it, too.

[snip

The play, which contained numerous profanities and sexual innuendos, and ridiculed Jesus Christ and Judeo-Christian morals, ended with a children's gospel choir singing this song to Santa:

"We don't care if you like boys.
We just want our damn toys.
We don't care if you are gay.
We love you Santa anyway."

[/ QUOTE ]
Focus Changed at Fistgate This Year; Less Raw Sex (http://www.massnews.com/2003_Editions/3_March/032003_mn_fistgate.shtml)

Here's a Google search that will provide a lot of info on this annual travesty in the Gay State.

'Fistgate' at MassNews (http://www.google.com/search?q=fistgate+site:www.massnews.com&amp;sourceid=o pera&amp;num=0&amp;ie=utf-8&amp;oe=utf-8')

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I am a bigot because I don't want Christianity in public schools?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you're a bigot because you want me to pay by threat of force for the establishment of your religion while you vigorously decry any attempt by those of other belief systems to present their ideas in your tax-funded forum.


[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I have seen far worse bigotry on this board that what I posted.

[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, we Christians sometimes forget that we serve a God who is in control of all things, and we need not try to take control ourselves. However, we have been objects of vituperative intolerance in the tax-funded, union-run government schools for years and years and years, while ideologies and "lifestyles" greatly offensive to us have been shamelessly promoted in these institutions with moneys taken from us by force.

We're just fed up with it. And it's within our purview as Christians to expose this hypocrisy. And in a Constitutional Republic, it is within our purview to demand remediation.


[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I am an active participant in the Grad Blast every year. I lecture my students relentlessly on the idiocy of alcohol use and premarital sex. My concern is with the Christians dictating what can be done at the Grad Blast. No hypnotist, no faux gambling...

[/ QUOTE ]
Hypnotism is NOT harmless. Even the secular psychologists will tell you that.

If "faux gambling" is alright with you, why not "faux smoking" or "faux drinking" or "faux sex"?


[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Because I don't worship a black book doesn't mean I am without morals.

[/ QUOTE ]We agree here. I don't worship a black book, either. That would be idolatry.

But while we're on the subject of morals, upon what external, objective, transcendent Truth do you base your morals? After all, to establish a moral code and impress it upon others, it must be rooted in a Truth that is true whether you like it or not, whether you believe it or not, whether you even KNOW it or not. It must be a Truth that is larger than the opinions of man, whether it be one man or the collective consensus of a majority of men.


[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
I have tried my best to have a high minded debate Westy. It doesn't seem very Christain of you to be so derogatory.

[/ QUOTE ]
How ironic it is that those professing such antipathy to Christianity will call upon it to defend themselves from it. And if backhanded compliments were art, you would be Andy Warhol. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

Nevertheless, if you have been offended by my posts, then I am sorry. I will endeavor to treat you more respectfully. Really.

Now back to business.

Don't you see the glaring hypocrisy of your position? Consider the following points from some of my earlier posts, which you have not yet addressed.


[ QUOTE ]
Westbrook said:
But as far as I'm concerned, y'all can live as you like, as long as you don't try to stop me and mine from living as we like.

Or force me to pay for you to live as you like.

That's the main problem I have with "public" schools.

I submit that, ultimately, all education is religious, because there is no way to keep transcendent thought out of it. Ultimately, questions concerning origins and destinies and morality arise.

And what answers are given?

Thomas Jefferson said:
<ul type="square">"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." [/list]I am being forced to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which I disbelieve and abhor. If I refuse to pay, I will be disposessed of my home. By force.

This is tyranny.

Ponch, you said,
<ul type="square">"I too believe in the first amendment, and the less religion we have forced down our throats, the happier I am." [/list] It is inconsistent for you to say this while you believe it's perfectly alright that I am compelled to pay by threat of force for you to educate your children and for the promotion of what has become the state religion of Humanism in its various denominations: pagan, atheist, agnostic, spiritist, etc.

Teachings on origins, destinies, and morals are inherently religious and cannot fall within the scope of tax-funded institutions without a First Amendment violation. Forcing people to pay for the promotion of one worldview over others only serves to exacerbate the divisions inherent in a society as diverse as ours has become.

On the one hand, as long as the government schools persist in favoring one set of theories and philosophies over another, even presenting said theories and philosophies as facts, they venture into the religious realm. One may teach about these things, but impartiality and respect for differing perspectives must be part of the mix. This is definitely not the case in any tax-funded school system in New Hampshire.

On the other hand, a values-neutral education is not only impossible; it's not even desirable. To educate children without imparting to them any intrinsic purpose for life, or any moral compass, or any sense of justice is not only negligent, but dangerous.

I submit that if public funding is to be provided at all, it should be given directly to the parents, the only requirement being that the money be spent for educational purposes, that they may choose for their own children the education that most closely reflects their own worldview. In a society as diverse as ours, a truly Public Education with its attendant government-mandated funding of government-mandated positions on origins, destinies, and morals can only be tyrannical.

[/ QUOTE ]


And, in another post:

[ QUOTE ]
Westbrook said:
I am compelled by threat of force to pay for the education of Ponch's children while he and his wife pursue their careers.

Even worse, the education for which I am compelled to pay by threat of force is hostile to my own beliefs concerning origins, destinies, and morals.

So while I am "allowed" to school my children outside of their perverted paradigm, I am still compelled by threat of force to pay for something that I cannot use, for reasons of conscience.

While my wife and I have decided to make the sacrifices necessary to educate our own children, Ponch and his wife, who represent the "majority", can exploit our sacrifice, since we are compelled to share the burden for educating their children, as they go about accumulating wealth or prestige or whatever other worldliness is fulfilled by pursuing two careers in one household.

And if we dare to pray over our food in a restaurant in the presence of Ponch and his family, we will be accused of shoving our religion down their throats.

Don't get me wrong. I do not resent Ponch and the millions he represents, nor am I bitter against them.

I only wish to expose their "theater of the absurd" hypocrisy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ponch, I do not believe that you have adequately addressed these points.

[ponch21]

Westy, we can all find something that we disagree with when it comes to tax expenditures. I am not happy that my tax dollars go to a bloated military budget. I am not happy that tax dollars are used to subsidize multinational corporations that have billion dollar profits. If it offends your moral system, don't pay your taxes. Simple civil disobedience. Thoreau did it back in the 1800s. You can do it now. Of course there will be consequences, but if it is a principle of yours act on it. If it is not important enought to face the consequences, quit complaining about it. The simple act of homeschooling your kids is a huge act of civil disobedience. Congrats. You are changing the system whether you believe it or not.

Our main disagreement is on the premise of education. I believe that good hard science should be taught to kids. If their religion disputes that science (origin) then that is up to the job of parents and pastors to indoctrinate their views. Lobo said in an earlier post that only facts should be taught. Yes, they should, but the world is not just based on fact. Young people should be ready to face opinion. They should be able to make sense of those facts by using a world view to put them in order. Education is responsible for teaching kids facts, and how to make sense of them. When I teach sociology, I present the facts, then the 3 basic sociological perspectives and how they analyze those facts.

Simply put,I don't believe that education is religious in nature. They are two separate institutions. We in education believe that there are other sources of knowlege and wisdom than the Bible. Even if you disagree with that knowledge and wisdom, it allows us to understand each other better if you obtain it.

As for my wife and I both having careers (which we don't right now - my wife is putting hers on hold) it had nothing to do with accumulating wealth. We are both teachers - put our salaries together, and we don't make what you do as an engineer. That said, I agree that many parents use school as a daycare. They would rather send their kids on the bus in an ice storm than have a day off of school. "What am I supposed to do with the kids?"

"So while I am "allowed" to school my children outside of their perverted paradigm, I am still compelled by threat of force to pay for something that I cannot use, for reasons of conscience."

We all use public education. It is called social infrastructure. Like highways, public water ways, public transportation, sewer systems, military, etc... The rest of society isn't going to give up their lives to homeschool their kids. Trust me, I have met many parents at conferences that should not even consider this option. As bad as public education is to some of you, this would be disasterous for this country.

We have been hearing for years how bad public education is, yet the United States continues to have the largest GDP in the world. We have one of the highest standards of living in the world. We must be doing something right.

Lastly, you like to bring up this pro-homosexual program. Everything you have posted about is obvioulsy inappropriate. There are bad school districts and teachers just like there are bad hospitals, bad accounting firms, bad energy corporations, bad lawyers, bad engineers etc... Should we condemn the entire system because of these bad examples? I think not.

I hope I have addressed the concerns you brought up Westy. Hope your family had a great 4th. Mine was spent getting ready to move.

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not happy that my tax dollars go to a bloated military budget.

[/ QUOTE ]
The military is specifically provided for by the Constitution. Where in that document is federal interference with or control of education authorized?

[Westbrook]

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
If it offends your moral system, don't pay your taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]
My Lord tells me to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's". So, as a Christian, I must pay my taxes. However, Scripture does not preclude us from reproaching governmental abuses. Paul the Apostle did it in Acts 22:25.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Our main disagreement is on the premise of education. I believe that good hard science should be taught to kids.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ponch, the "science" of origins is an arcturian landscape, being subject to change without notice. It is NOT "good hard science" by any stretch of the definition of that term. It is a religion, based on faith in the interpretations of data filtered through a humanist-atheist worldview.

The ends of this Humanistic worldview are Nihilism and Hedonism. If those haven't become the dominant poles in our culture, then I must've missed something.

You can pollute your children with that rubbish, but I should not be compelled by threat of force to pay for its propagation.

The root of the word "science" comes from the Latin for "to know". Unless you were there to observe with your five senses, measure, and record, you CANNOT know. Physics is awash with explanations about what eletcro-magnetism is, though we can exploit its observable, measurable, recordable characteristics. If you read any of what's going on in modern physics, you know that you can't even be certain of your observations.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Simply put,I don't believe that education is religious in nature.

[/ QUOTE ]
We sharply disagree here. You haven't explained to me from whence comes your authority to impress your moral code upon your students. You said that you discourage pre-marital sex and alcoholic beverages. Indeed, we do, too, but we have a code based upon Truths that exist outside of and independent from the vicissitudes of man and his opinions. If you do not have an external, transcendent, objective Truth upon which to base your moral code, all you have is your opinion. And where your opinion is congruent or intersects with Truth is subject to change with the times.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
They are two separate institutions. We in education believe that there are other sources of knowlege and wisdom than the Bible. Even if you disagree with that knowledge and wisdom, it allows us to understand each other better if you obtain it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here's a little wisdom from outside the Bible and outside the myopic, inbred circus of atheistic "science". As an engineer, it would be silly of me to propose that the computer upon which I am posting this just happened out of nothing from nowhere for no apparent reason. As an engineer, I can readily see the hallmarks of purposeful design and organization. The lunatics running the asylum of "science" cannot see this. Those that do, cannot or will not explain it.

You can read Leslie Orgel's web page and find a lot of "could have", "may have", "should have", "possibly did", etc. Nowhere does he state any of his theories of abiogenisis as fact. He is a responsible scientist even though he is committed to his atheistic religion. Yet abiogenisis is taught as fact in the tax-funded, union-run government schools.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
We all use public education. It is called social infrastructure. Like highways, public water ways, public transportation, sewer systems, military, etc...

[/ QUOTE ]
I would not qualify as "infrastructure" a tax-funded, union-run government-school, based on Marxian principles, teaching a Nihilistic theory of origins as fact, thereby promoting the Humanist state religion, infested with sex and drugs, and "graduating" millions of functional illiterates every year. Besides, highways, public waterways, public transportation, sewer systems, military, etc, do not promote any philosophies or infuse the minds of children with silly ideas.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
The rest of society isn't going to give up their lives to homeschool their kids. Trust me, I have met many parents at conferences that should not even consider this option. As bad as public education is to some of you, this would be disasterous for this country.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody has been able to explain to my satisfaction how this would be more disastrous than the Marxian train wreck we call "public education".

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
We have been hearing for years how bad public education is, yet the United States continues to have the largest GDP in the world. We have one of the highest standards of living in the world. We must be doing something right.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much longer do you think that will persist as our "public education" paradigm continues to slouch towards the abyss of illiterate, innumerate, nihilistic-hedonism.

Besides, I believe that most of the GDP is in FOOD, not in manufactured goods, though I don't have the reference handy.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
Lastly, you like to bring up this pro-homosexual program. Everything you have posted about is obvioulsy inappropriate.

[/ QUOTE ]
By what standard do you determine that this stuff is "inappropriate"? Certainly not by what your union, the NEA, believes.

All of this unsavory stuff will be coming to a school district near you.

Soon.

Read the NEA web page. Read the minutes from their annual meetings. After all, they are your union. You should know what they are up to.

[ QUOTE ]
ponch21 said:
There are bad school di