This Country is Coming Apart at Its Seams.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Are people who home school child abusers?

Unless they are knowledgable enough to teach all the subjects in the national curriculum and are able dedicate the time necessary to educate their child to the required standard, then yes I'd say they are guilty of child abuse. I know of very few people who I would consider to be qualified to home school. I am not one of them.

- Granted. That is actually my opinion of MY ability as well. However, I also not so trusting to believe that everything that is in the "national curriculum" is correct either.

If you're not qualified to teach the national curriculum, how are you qualified to say whether it is correct?

There are subjects I am not qualified to teach nor am I qualified to say whether the national curriculum is correct. But if I refused to allow my kids to learn on an equal footing with all the other kids, I'd be doing them a disservice.

It's better to criticise a subject for what it actually is rather than what I might erroneously think it is.

Did you skip over the section where I learned that what I learned in high school was wrong?

[d_squared431 0]

Quote

Have presidents done this much in the past? I don't remember it happening when I was a kid...

Can't say the pledge, but hafta listen to the pres?

There were two address to school age kids for the drug war in the 80's. The only political figure to ever make a mandatory address to school aged children was Hitler. We all know how that turned out...

TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1
I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH
You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

The people promoting the idea that kids shouldn't listen to this talk are, in my mind, just as silly as the people that protested Harry Potter being available in school libraries...

There is a HUGE difference between making something available, and forcing people to listen to something.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

Are you seriously suggesting that kids are better off dropping out of school?

I seriously think that many kids would be better off with non-traditional schooling, such as home schooling, than they would be if they were forced into public schools.

Yes. Seriously. No, I'm not being silly.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[wmw999 2,123]

Depending on the definition of "many" I'd have to agree with this. One thing to consider is that for some of these kids, the long-term limitation of not having had traditional schooling will probably be outweighed by the fact that they will have actually learned something in the settings their parents chose.

For others, it will be a lifelong limitation that they will rail against. Yes, they could do something substantive, like go back and work through community and regular college (after which it won't make a lick of difference).

The problem with trusting most parents to make the best choice for their children is the appalling number who don't. But the alternative, of not trusting parents, is generally worse.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kbordson 8]

Quote

The problem with trusting most parents to make the best choice for their children is the appalling number who don't. But the alternative, of not trusting parents, is generally worse.

Wendy P.

True. An appalling number don't.

But, we are willing to trust them to HAVE the children. Allowing them to reproduce without expecting the responsibility of taking care of those children. There is something wrong with that.

If we trust them to get pregnant, if we trust them to have the children... we should TRUST them to raise them.

If you can't... then you have to ask... do you trust them to get pregnant?

And then opens up the whole can on reproductive rights.

With rights come responsibilities. PERIOD.

It is the PARENTS responsibility.

If they want to name the child "Jesus" or "Hitler." If they want to breast or bottle feed. If they want to home school or public. If they want to send their child to government lectures or not... Those are all independent decisions that THEY get to make.

Some of those decisions I would agree with, some I wouldn't. But ultimately it's NONE OF MY BUSINESS.

[wmw999 2,123]

Quote

it's NONE OF MY BUSINESS

It becomes my business when
- I can't find an educated person to fill a job
- the doctor's office is crammed with people looking for antibiotics for their cold
- I get to choose between letting other people's children starve to death and paying to feed and house them
- I get to pay for the cure instead of the prevention

I'd rather pay for the prevention. Others would rather pay for the cure. Others would rather simply punish. The one constant is that as long as there are irresponsible people out there, they are not going to pick up their fair share, and their children (and the rest of us) are going to suffer for it.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

it's NONE OF MY BUSINESS

It becomes my business when
-I'd rather pay for the prevention. Others would rather pay for the cure. Others would rather simply punish. The one constant is that as long as there are irresponsible people out there, they are not going to pick up their fair share, and their children (and the rest of us) are going to suffer for it.

Wendy P.

But... we don't truly "prevent." You know that and I know that and we both know that to suggest "preventing" the irresponsible parents from having children would NEVER and SHOULD never fly. You mean that you prefer "limited" prevention via governent controls. But those controls also interfere with those that might be responsible parents.

It's a trade off. Do you allow the government to control or do you expect personal responsibility for personal decisions?

I know it's not "realistic." But... it's still my hope.

[turtlespeed 212]

The simple reality here is that the left knowing that this will be a political speech, blinded by the likelyhood that they will agree with the message, thinks it is ok to use this platform as a conduit for their approved propaganda.

If this tactic was tried during the last administration, the roles may have simply been reversed.

It is a credibility issue. If you appoint Czars that are screaming Marxists to your administration, it is going to make people nervous and resentful.

I can't believe he hasn't cancelled the speech considering how many dollars are going to be wasted and denied the school districts based on attendance.

Perhaps a similar situation is needed, not unlike a strike, something unions do.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 3]

Tom, I read what the people are saying. I see the fear and it's unfounded. An unfounded fear is paranoia.

The idea that Obama is going to "indoctrinate" kids is simply bullshit. It's an idea that was tossed out by the national equivalent of forum trolls, some other folks are now listening to this bullshit and have become paranoid of what the President of the United States may have to say about kids staying in school and getting a good education.

I'm sorry, but if people are afraid of that, then they actually are correctly described as being paranoid.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[BDashe 0]

Ummmmm... So I'm joining late, i kinda skimmed the thread.

First off, I think the name calling and labeling is hysterical by the same old offenders, not to mention about as hypocritical as you can get.

If i had a kid, I'd probably let em listen to the speech and go over it with them at home afterwards to see what their thoughts were.

I think it is fine people are pulling their kids from school, nothing wrong with disagreeing with the president's agenda. I think it is a bit of a stretch saying that the country is coming apart at the seams, however I feel the country hasn't been more divided in years, possibly as long as i can remember (which isnt THAT long i suppose...).

Obama has done a pretty sh*tty job of reaching across the aisle. Now I will say, the right hasn't really given him much of an opprtunity as they arent exactly extending an olive branch. I think the main reason is because the dems control EVERYTHING right now, and Obama wanted to make his 'clean break' from the Bush admin, so he rammed a bunch of liberal sh*t our way in the first 100 days, and no one could do sh*t about it.

Right there he lost the trust of the right by putting on a show for the left. Now, when he tries to reach across, the right hates him for his left wing power as our checks and balances are crippled, and the left are frustrated he isn't sticking his course and socializing the US.

This ties into the speech because I think the guy is honestly trying to reach out to the kids and inspire them. Look how good he was in the primaries, and leading up to election day. His "Yes we can!" campaign was legendary with inspiring people to 'vote for change,' whatever the hell that meant. Talk about an ambiguous, sexy political slogan! Bottom line, he inspired people.

Anyway, i think the guy has his heart in the right place, but his tactics and policy are just so far left, he loses touch with reality. I think he genuinely wants to inspire kids to do well in school, but then he tries to throw sh*t in, for example, like to have students 'write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.' THAT gets scary and reminiscent of a dictatorship.

That is not 'ask not what you can do for yourself, but what you can do for your country' that rings of 'help me succeed in my agenda.' The guy just can't seem to get it right, errr, i should say correct.

Based on the last 30-40 years of politics, not nearly as many people are willing to follow political leaders blindly on their paths of righteousness. We are in the information age and we know about alterior motives. So before you judge someone for not having faith in our progressively more left leaning government, understand they're trying to protect their children from potential propaganda that loosely ties to influential leaders of the past which ended in disaster.


edit- bold

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[d_squared431 0]

I just got off the phone with my sister who went to the school to find out a little more about this. The school so far has had over whelming amounts of calls saying if they show this their child/children will be kept home. They are going to do a mass call this evening to let the parents know if this will be shown or not.
This is an Elementary school k-6th grade. I would not have as big of an issue with this if my child was in 7th-12th grade. My child is too young to sit thru- and understand what it is Obama has to say. Hell, most adults cant understand what it is he is doing/saying most the time.

TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1
I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH
You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Tom, I read what the people are saying. I see the fear and it's unfounded. An unfounded fear is paranoia.

The idea that Obama is going to "indoctrinate" kids is simply bullshit. It's an idea that was tossed out by the national equivalent of forum trolls, some other folks are now listening to this bullshit and have become paranoid of what the President of the United States may have to say about kids staying in school and getting a good education.

I'm sorry, but if people are afraid of that, then they actually are correctly described as being paranoid.

Good thing that you're not in psych. You can't give anyone that doesn't think like you a DSM diagnosis of 297.1.

You've demonstrated in this thread that, according to you, the only "correct" opinion or belief is one that you hold. And that if someone doesn't hold the same opinion, all she/he needs is "a little education."

So... basically, I'm reading that I'm more tolerant than you. I'm willing to see your beliefs and those of my friends (and that I hold as well) regarding suspicion with respect to this Governement sponsored news broadcast to children. As a parent, if you want your child to have that experience - it's available. If you don't - it's your right to exclude them.

You can have whatever level of trust that you want. I should be allowed the same respect without getting a psych diagnosis.

[quade 3]

Ah, perfect, now you want to be pedantic and use words only according to one clinical definition when, in fact, they have others. Fine. Whatever floats your boat I guess.

Quote

You've demonstrated in this thread that, according to you, the only "correct" opinion or belief is one that you hold. And that if someone doesn't hold the same opinion, all she/he needs is "a little education."

First of all, what Obama is going to talk about isn't my "opinion". It's what has been published and I linked to it. If you choose to ignore that and rant about it. I can't help you. Fine, ignore, rant.

You and others appear to have been trolled by some people using this talk about staying in school and getting good grades as an opportunity to create division. You now appear to be too embarrassed to admit it even when facts are presented to show otherwise.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Ah, perfect, now you want to be pedantic and use words only according to one clinical definition when, in fact, they have others. Fine. Whatever floats your boat I guess.

You're kidding, right? So the fact that YOU threw up your silly definition last night (and then deleted it) wasn't doing EXACTLY the same thing?

Quote

Quote

You've demonstrated in this thread that, according to you, the only "correct" opinion or belief is one that you hold. And that if someone doesn't hold the same opinion, all she/he needs is "a little education."

First of all, what Obama is going to talk about isn't my "opinion". It's what has been published and I linked to it. If you choose to ignore that and rant about it. I can't help you.

You started your insults in post 3.
Your link was post ?

I knew what the speech is "supposed" to be about. My comments are not about one script, rather the precedent that it would set about Government sponsored presentations to children.

I've mentioned that MANY times over. Please catch up, m'kay.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Based on the last 30-40 years of politics, not nearly as many people are willing to follow political leaders blindly on their paths of righteousness. We are in the information age and we know about alterior motives. So before you judge someone for not having faith in our progressively more left leaning government, understand they're trying to protect their children from potential propaganda that loosely ties to influential leaders of the past which ended in disaster.

Thank you for phrasing that better than I have been able.

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Are people who home school child abusers?

Unless they are knowledgable enough to teach all the subjects in the national curriculum and are able dedicate the time necessary to educate their child to the required standard, then yes I'd say they are guilty of child abuse. I know of very few people who I would consider to be qualified to home school. I am not one of them.

- Granted. That is actually my opinion of MY ability as well. However, I also not so trusting to believe that everything that is in the "national curriculum" is correct either.

If you're not qualified to teach the national curriculum, how are you qualified to say whether it is correct?

When my father retired from the Air Force he was looking to supplement his retirement by working as a substitute teacher. Having a bachelors in math and a masters in business would you say my father is qualified to teach? Well he wasn't. Why? The soul criteria that deemed him unqualified was because he didn't take typing in college. Seriously.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[JackC 0]

Quote

Did you skip over the section where I learned that what I learned in high school was wrong?

So you'd let your kids drop out of school because they dared to teach an abridged version of history?

Nobody said a national curriculum was perfect and there's nothing to stop you supplementing public education with extra tutoring, but I think it would be a dumb judgment call to extract your children from public education unless you are damn sure you can do a better job. Not just think you can, but actually know your stuff and can teach it to the required standards.

[Beachbum 0]

ok ... I read thru the thread, and as seems to be "the usual" with stuff like this, the discussion has degenerated significantly and nobody offered a real solution. I don't have kids, but my opinion is that I don't feel it is appropriate for ANY politician to give a speech to school children that they are required to listen to/view.

Seems quite simple to me ... run the speech on public tv at say, 7pm ... let parents sit and watch it with their kids if they choose, or have their kids not watch it if they choose. If they want to screen it first, most people have a vcr/dvd or some way to record it then play it back if they deem it ok for their kids.

As long as you are happy with yourself ... who cares what the rest of the world thinks?

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

Did you skip over the section where I learned that what I learned in high school was wrong?

So you'd let your kids drop out of school because they dared to teach an abridged version of history?

Nobody said a national curriculum was perfect and there's nothing to stop you supplementing public education with extra tutoring, but I think it would be a dumb judgment call to extract your children from public education unless you are damn sure you can do a better job. Not just think you can, but actually know your stuff and can teach it to the required standards.

Would I "let my child drop out"? Probably not. Would I suppliment that education? Probably. In fact, I have kept my notes and teaching materials from that Rhetoric class. I would likely discuss those papers with my child(ren).... IF I had children.

But do I want to see the government stepping in and controlling the choices that parents have? No. I want my friends to have the right to home school. EVEN IF I wouldn't do it myself. I want to parents to have the right to pull their child from classes or events that they aren't comfortable with - my mother pulled me and my sisters from the "mandatory" IQ test when we were in middle school; parents pull children from holiday programs; some object to teachings of contraception in health class. As a parent, it's their right. Are they decisions that I personally agree with? No, but I don't have to.

If I were to have children, then I can decide the exposures. Until then, I will defend the rights of those that do have children.... even if it means they make the "wrong" choice.

[JackC 0]

Quote

Until then, I will defend the rights of those that do have children.... even if it means they make the "wrong" choice.

I dislike rules as well. If someone says I can't do something, I'll want to know why and if they can't give me good reason I'll probably do it anyway on general principle.

But you have to wonder, if I make a choice that only affects myself, that's one thing. But if I make a choice that negatively affects someone else, should that be allowed? If a parent makes a wrong choice regarding their kids, at what point does the wrongness of that choice become child abuse?

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

Until then, I will defend the rights of those that do have children.... even if it means they make the "wrong" choice.

I dislike rules as well. If someone says I can't do something, I'll probably do it anyway on general principle.

But you have to wonder, if I make a choice that only affects myself, that's one thing. But if I make a choice that negatively affects someone else, should that be allowed? If a parent makes a wrong choice regarding their kids, at what point does the wrongness of that choice become child abuse?

That's a completely different discussion.

The only way it would relate to this topic is if you feel that pulling the child from this program would be considered "abuse."

If you want to open up that discussion on parental rights and government involvement - then we would discuss spankings, religious (Amish, Jehovah Witnesses - medical implications),

[pirana 0]

Quote

What have you been reading or listening to that leads you to believe otherwise?

Too much talk radio is probably what they've been listening to.

Got in somebody else's car this past week for a quick ride. They had the radio parked on the local talk show. Tuned in right in the middle of an emotional rant by the host about the dangers of the Death Panel.

Once those talking heads label something; the sheep never forget.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[pirana 0]

Quote

Speaking as a parent, I would've have been thrilled had my child been given the opportunity to hear a sitting president speak. Period.

There you go. May not like him, may not agree with him; but still a chance to say hello, shake his hand, maybe give him a little advice. He holds the most powerful political office in the free world - I'd dig the chance to hello in person.

BTW, my wife drew Air Force One duty for a couple weeks when she was an FA. She was low person on the crew, so got assigned to the chase plane (press). She got to meet a bunch of them, and upon deplaning, they got a quick meet and greet with Mr Clinton. I have his nuts to prove it!

Really. She got a bunch of promo stuff as part of the handshake tour and a look inside AF1. One of the trinkets was a box of peanut M&M's packaged specifically for the Prez. So yes, we have Bill Clinton's nuts in a box on the shelf in the den; right next to Mom's ashes, and the Far Side Anthology.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[tkhayes 126]

no i did not read any of your posts - my reply was a response to the first item in this thread. I did not (and probably will not) read the entire thread.

I already 'read' the entire thread through regular news (and the speech too).