Posted on 12/05/2007 3:27:06 AM PST by Man50D
No need to apologize. I should have been able to figure that out. Will pray for your situation.
Thanks...I think I will need prayers after I talk to that school tomorrow...Its strange how Sassy is never sick with URI’s in the summer when she is away from that school too. But the principal tells me its me the overreacting mother.
Don’t nag your hubby, but keep on him. Your daighter needs to get out of that school for her health.
Many colleges are now seeking out homeschoolers preferentially because they have found that they are on average better students and, especially, because they are more mature and better adjusted socially. The Air Force has recruiters for the Air Force Academy that target homeschoolers. The other Service Academies may also be targeting them.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If a private school tells kids to shut up there is no First Amendment violation. The school is freely chosen and the parents agree to the rules beforehand. Also, a private school can not send out police to force attendance as government schools can and do.
For those children whose parents can not ransom them with private school tuition and homeschool government school is compulsory. Armed police, foster care workers, and courts stand ready to force the will of the government school workers.
There is a better way that gets the big fat thumb of government out of the eye of the First Amendment.
Solution: Make all K-12 education private. Parents would pay for their own kid’s education. Vouchers or tax credits for the poor to use in the private marketplace of schooling.
Kimberly GG,
I have a doctorate in a highly respected and highly competitive health profession. I worked at this for 6 years ( owned my own practice) before homeschooling. Before that I was a registered nurse.
I too can honestly say that I have never met a homeschooling mom who hasn’t worked before deciding to homeschool.
I had a discussion with a Blue & Gold officer (Naval Academy recruiter) a couple of years ago, and she told me that they are glad to get homeschoolers. She even recommended some ways that my son could get involved in sports, because sports achievement is a major requirement for all three academies.
My son is considering a service career, though he may go ROTC.
Thank you...points well taken.
The justification for the method and the book are even worse: Skinner believed the world overpopulated and with excessive demands upon resources. His is a characteristically elitist view with no faith that God will provide if we abide by His Torah. So he created a method by which to condition people into accepting poverty, tyranny, and no respect for human life.
Thanks everyone for all your input, I have read them all.
Ordinarily I'd be 100% behind your idea, unfortunately I know [of] far too many idiots masquerading as "parents" who'd pocket any check coming their way equaling a net zero sum gain for the kids. Be different if all parents loved, cared about the children they've brought into the world, but that's not the case.
"That said, I think a more achievable goal would be to make private school tuition and homeschool expenses tax deductible. This would put the private schools on a toe to toe basis with the public schools without threatening the public school gravy train."
I can enthusiastically get behind your idea; however, I believe it has been suggested before -- ie, "Bring *competition* to the education process..." Like our free market economy, I really believe it'd work to bring real change AND results.
So.
What do you think the chances any semblance of your idea ever seeing the light of day? ;^)
"The teachers' unions and other libs would fight it hard, but it would be winnable."
You bet they'd fight, for their very lives *&* with the same ferocity as those staffing the IRS (visa vi eliminating the tax code) or SS (visa vi SS Administration) and on & on.
There seems to be a whole lot more "3rd rails" these days causing the republic to grow weaker & weaker each day these perceived untouchable issues aren't addressed. But I'm preaching to the chorus telling you that, huh.
Unfortunately the reality of the matter is our governmental *institutions* have become so large they've assumed a life of their own, complete with unionized *protection*.
Just in case the voters, en mass, saw things as we do there'd be the judicial activist judge(s) overruling any & all their ideological POV didn't agree with, also.
The Liberal-Socialists have learned well from their god, *Clintigula*, Mr.S.
The suckers swear by a scorched earth policy and will waste anything or body who gets in the way of them *or* their agenda, children included. The opposition [read: me/us] must keep all these dynamics in mind before a plan's executed to change the paradigm, that's for sure, just ask Newt. We've seen [it] before and we'll see it again should "they" be threatened.
The only solution for now I can see insofar as any child's education & welfare goes is for the concerned, engaged parent to home school.
What other reasonable course can one take to enhance their child's best chances under the present circumstances?
By leave union-thug *teachers* & the misfit-students infesting the public school system to themselves, one deals a quiet blow to the very foundation of the tower thats been built.
About as compassionate as this compassionate conservative can get at this stage of the game, Rome's burning and we're ALL threatened by the mediocrity, banality the public system seems to be striving for/toward.
If one cannot change the system then one's compelled to reinvent it, *if* they genuinely care?
I'd wager good money it wouldn't be long before the entire public education house of cards collapsed under the weight of its own corruption *&* inefficiency in such a scenario, forcing BIG change.
Caring refugee-parents from the public system might even vigorously search out home schooling parents after the dust settled seeking advise on how it has to be done, properly?
I mean nothing breeds success like success, right?
"There is no irrational hatred, there is only disgust at his irrationality."
What I've heard about the man --to me, so far-- sounds awfully irrational, even alarmist.
What's true & untrue in this day & age of mass disseminated disinformation is a tricky business and I for one am hedging my bets.
In any event it's way too early --for me-- to make a choice, even when I do it'll be for my primary vote.
Let us on the right be patient with our own while concentrating our effort(s) on the real enemies of the republic, that means the Democrat Party and every one of their candidates.
"As an FR mod once said, Paul's followers have become the Ministry of Silly Explanations."
Perhaps.
Though I appreciate your sentiments, it'll be the American voter who'll decide what is & isn't a silly explanation, my friend, *not* a mod.
...from here, or otherwise.
The system would require that the funds be spent on education. The voucher would be owned by the parents, but the money could only go from the government to a school or tutor. Those home schoolers who refused to take government money could opt out. No one would get a check they could spend on booze, drugs or a big screen TV.
What do you think the chances any semblance of your idea ever seeing the light of day? ;^)
A portion of the electorate has to buy into an idea before a politician can lead on it, or he gets shot down at the ballot box. That's why I think Huckabee is the second least electable Republican, because the Fair Tax will only serve as a Dem talking point, not as a draw to our banner.
The only solution for now I can see insofar as any child's education & welfare goes is for the concerned, engaged parent to home school. What other reasonable course can one take to enhance their child's best chances under the present circumstances?
Good private schools are good private schools. Moreover, I don't see where we should back off tax deductions because of the Hildabeast any more than we've backed off on abortion because the abortion industry is powerful. What if Henry Hyde had said "Well, we can't ban federal funding for abortion because our enemies really, really love abortion"?
What I've heard about the man --to me, so far-- sounds awfully irrational, even alarmist.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting him to get the nomination, but...between him and his staff, he's up to six appearances on the Alex Jones show now, and he's appeared in 1 Aaron Russo documentary and two Jones documentaries, including one caled "American Dictators" that's about how Bush "stole" the 2000 election. Do you really think it's a reasonable idea to put a guy in the White House who is helping the truther movement? For this reason, Ron Paul could agree with me on every single issue and I still wouldn't consider criticism of him to be "irrational" or "alarmist." He's either a nut, or he's a person willing to appeal to enemies of the Republic to help him accomplish his persoanl political aims. A person like that need not apply, thank you.
Though I appreciate your sentiments, it'll be the American voter who'll decide what is & isn't a silly explanation, my friend, *not* a mod.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize that quoting a person's opinion meant that I was nominating that person for God-King of The Universe.
“That said, I think a more achievable goal would be to make private school tuition and homeschool expenses tax deductible.”
Agreed. A much better alternative than vouchers. I can think of dozens of reasons why vouchers are not a good idea, but one rises to the top of the heap: government funds always come with strings attached. Always. And the most likely place to see conditions placed is on the curriculum.
bump
You make an excellent point.
That might work, your last sentence was what addressed my main concern.
As we all know (by now) nearly every damned thing the republic's citizens have done [read: paid for] on behalf of the "less fortunate", all done with the best intention, has been made a mockery by every kind of thief one can imagine.
No mas.
>What do you think the chances any semblance of your idea ever seeing the light of day? ;^)
"A portion of the electorate has to buy into an idea before a politician can lead on it, or he gets shot down at the ballot box."
Agreed, enter the NEA & other outfit (whatever it calls itself) though; hence, the the firestorm of resistance. I can almost hear/see the propaganda now, can't you?
Won't speculate on how pols of either side would/will react; but, then again, need I?
The cowards will do what they always do: head for the tall grass so fast new land speed records will be set. Gutless wonders, all.
"That's why I think Huckabee is the second least electable Republican, because the Fair Tax will only serve as a Dem talking point, not as a draw to our banner."
Maybe.
Don't know a whole lot of the man, as I'd said -- or other candidates, per se -- except to say he & his campaign will live or die on merit as judged by the voters. (I now know you don't care to hear [that] but it's the bottom line, nonetheless.)
>The only solution for now I can see insofar as any child's education & welfare goes is for the concerned, engaged parent to home school. What other reasonable course can one take to enhance their child's best chances under the present circumstances?
"Good private schools are good private schools."
Of course they are, and they're prospering for those fortunate enough to have the resources at hand.
But listen those operating private schools realize the value of their product, know all too well for some parents the alternative is no alternative a'tall and charge for their service, accordingly.
If not for the expense I'd have to say private schools would've driven the public schools out of business long ago.
Moreover for the sake of conversation let's assume the republic embraced the whole voucher thing (or any iteration) lock, stock & barrel. The citizens fully recognize the urgent need & reasons therein, OK?
Think the cost to parents would parallel that of pharmaceuticals following the federal program *guaranteeing/subsidizing* elderly PRx users?
For better or worse it's the nature of our free market economy to charge whatever the market will bear; and, to me [that] has always meant prices go up, sometimes dramatically.
That'd be an issue, a big issue & after the fact, y'know. We could very well windup with the same unsatisfactory educators due to the economics of the matter since precious few regard *anything* --nevermind teaching-- a *calling* anymore these days. It's the era of, "show me the money!". One private school goes under due to lack of performance, another sprouts up and probably with the same people at the helm.
"Moreover, I don't see where we should back off tax deductions because of the Hildabeast any more than we've backed off on abortion because the abortion industry is powerful."
Agree, again; however, look at the reality of American politics, today. Our side have a whale of a battle on our hands to prevent the Hildebeats --or any other of their lice-- from RAISING taxes in numerous ways should they attain power. Tax deductions visa vi vouchers are at this time the least of our troubles we'll be forced to deal with.
"What if Henry Hyde had said 'Well, we can't ban federal funding for abortion because our enemies really, really love abortion'?"
The miserable Liberal-Socialists have used Hyde's move as ammunition to bolster their supporters for years. A win for the unborn, yes; and, a BIG win for the Liberal-Socialists, no?
In any event God Bless ol' Henry, how in the world he ever got [it] through with the WA political climate being what it is I'll never know.
>What I've heard about the man --to me, so far-- sounds awfully irrational, even alarmist.
"Don't get me wrong..."
After the last statement of your reply to me you say that?
HA!!
OK, I won't.
Promise. {g}
"I'm not expecting him to get the nomination, but...between him and his staff, he's up to six appearances on the Alex Jones show now, and he's appeared in 1 Aaron Russo documentary and two Jones documentaries, including one caled "American Dictators" that's about how Bush "stole" the 2000 election."
I've heard both the names you've mention; but, in all honesty never heard of much of 'em before.
Guess I gotta get out more.
"Do you really think it's a reasonable idea to put a guy in the White House who is helping the truther movement?"
Of course not.
However I find nothing --whatsoever-- objectionable of anyone who disagrees with me, my politics or the war, per se, on constitutional grounds. Doesn't mean I'd vote for 'em, just respect their right to voice an opinion and especially if the individual seeks to lead the nation as our POTUS. I'd *like* to hear real thoughts, opinions, goals etc in lieu of [the] distortions, spin and lies I'm used to hearing?
"For this reason, Ron Paul could agree with me on every single issue and I still wouldn't consider criticism of him to be "irrational" or "alarmist." He's either a nut, or he's a person willing to appeal to enemies of the Republic to help him accomplish his persoanl political aims. A person like that need not apply, thank you."
Fair enough, noted.
I'm not so fast to label one a, "nut", "enemy of the republic" etc based on what others tell me. I'd rather hear words from their own mouth when it comes to pols. Even so, I [really] do respect your opinion, and, will *key-in* to Paul when he does speak from this point forward, because you may very well be absolutely correct in your assessment of the guy. ;^)
>Though I appreciate your sentiments, it'll be the American voter who'll decide what is & isn't a silly explanation, my friend, *not* a mod.
"I'm sorry, I didn't realize that quoting a person's opinion meant that I was nominating that person for God-King of The Universe."
Snippy-snippy. :o)
IF you've been around here long enough you've heard/read all kinds of people quoted to lend credence to one's argument. Many times there were half truths, spin etc found after a little digging.
Wasn't kicking you in the shin, my friend.
The *voter*, whether or not they're "informed", are going to choose the next POTUS, period.
RKBA Democrat said: "I can think of dozens of reasons why vouchers are not a good idea, but one rises to the top of the heap: government funds always come with strings attached. Always. And the most likely place to see conditions placed is on the curriculum."
Amen to that.
Totally forgot the long reach of the federal leviathan (as a long time poster no longer with the forum used to like saying).
That one's a biggy, IMO.
The #1 concern I have of our government being in charge of disseminating public monies; or, in control of most everything else.
...for that matter.
Amen!
Thanks!
“Amen to that. Totally forgot the long reach of the federal leviathan (as a long time poster no longer with the forum used to like saying). That one’s a biggy, IMO.”
I’m a big fan of home education and to a lesser extent private schools, but I do not like vouchers. I just don’t understand this idea that people can’t be trusted to spend their own resources as they see necessary and thus we need a government program to distribute the funds (i.e. vouchers).
The implicit argument of vouchers is that parents, if they have the resources to pay for their own children’s education, would not do so. So we have to have a voucher system to ensure that parents won’t run off and buy crack or malt liquor. Sure, there is a hard core of parents who will never do the responsible thing. But why do we want to put a control system in effect for the 1-5% of parents who would act irresponsibly?
I like tax credits a lot more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.