So you live in the heart of the Southern Bible Belt. Your neighbors have elected an anti-evolution teaching skool bored. You don’t have the money to afford adequate private education for your children. What do you do?Or you live in an urban area with the now usual violence in the public schools and once again you can’t afford private schooling. What do you do?A California ruling says you can’t homeschool unless you are a certified educator. Great news for the teacher unions and real bad news for the Dobson Focus on the Family. Read the link to the title to this posting. Also, Ask Rockridge is discussing this situation. Can a progressive support homeschooling?Got Children? Discuss…..Peter Nuhn
“I guess it’s part of the atheist tradition to make claims without being able to back them up…”
Phree
Kinda like claiming there is a creator and he is of course the Christian verison of a creator ??? I love when you put your foot in your mouth !!!!
alatham,
Ok, one more thing.
You:
“One last thing. The reason I put intelligence in quotes is because it’s a very poorly defined term and I noticed a few people trying to use it in their arguments. I was indirectly criticizing this.”
I never questioned this. No need to justify. I gotchya. I asked what ‘bothers’ you.
“What is more important- A child’s education or you pushing your agenda on the public…?”
Phree
Again the christians are the ones who want everyone in public schools to pray or prey to their particular god of worship ? so who is the one who is pushing their agenda’s ????
Phreeliar,
Actually it’s Article 1, Section 7…
And by the way, I’ve now read through my entire copy of the U.S. Constitution (currently sitting here on my desk) and as I suspected, you again prove yourself a liar. There is no mention of the words ‘God’, ‘Gods’, or ‘Creator’ ANYWHERE in it.
As a good Christian, I bet you’ll continue to perpetuate this lie.
And with that, I will now return to my “Do not respond to the mentally ill, lying Christian fundamentalist known as Phreedm” policy.
4-F phreedy…
I found the clause… that’s how I was able to refer to it… that would have been clear to intelligent people… sorry…
Keep trying, though… someday you’ll get there…
pastahead,
So basically we have my own feelings about my own writings and we have your feelings about my writings. And your feelings are the only ones that matter?
I think you’d be wrong to do so. But since you haven’t presented an argument, I can’t say for sure.
No, when did I say that? Furthermore, why would I say that?
I said this: “But it does bother me that some home schoolers will purposefully shelter their children from the real world.”
You seem to have taken it to mean this: “It bothers me that some home schooled children don’t learn about the real world, but all public schooled children do.” This is absurd and is something I would never agree with. If I’m wrong, then please correct me.
Let me phrase my argument this way: If we view formalized education as one small part of the window that a child learns about the world, then it’s clear that home schooling parents have more personal control over how much of the world comes through that window than public schooling parents. In a neutral world, this is neither a good nor bad thing.
But in this particular country and at this particular time, there are many more religious people than there are irreligious people. This necessarily leads to more children being strongly indoctrinated into intolerant beliefs. Just how many more, I can’t say. This is what bothers me.
The other side of the coin is that some parents will do a much better job of introducing their children to a diverse set of experiences. I believe this group to be in the minority, but I have no proof.
Again, home schooling does not bother me. I am also not saying that public schooling is better than home schooling.
I think you’re trying to be condescending here, but I can’t say for sure. I can say that I didn’t do any research at all since they’re my opinions and I was defending my own words.
This really bothers me. If this is true then how could you call yourself a freethinker? No freethinker could ever be beyond shame.
answers.com:
Hey 4-F… above you stated that “of course” the Constitution and Bill or Rights mentions the Christian god, or a creator…
I suppose you’re ready to back up that assertion now…?
Article and section, please…
Bill OF Rights, not or
pastahead,
How did you come to this conclusion? What possible reason could I have to pick on those that were better or worse off than me?
Who are you and why are you attacking me? Are you an infallible psychoanalyst?
To answer your question, I had enough friends to be happy as a child, but I was shy and awkward enough to have been the bullied, not the bully. I am not in the habit of attacking people preemptively. I am shamed at the few times I did this when I was young. I would apologize if it were possible.
I would like to thank karen for her fine research in finding numerous and sundry gods within the text of the preamble. Praise be to Isis. I thought it might be interesting to see if the framers placed any importance on the christian god, they would also include it in the preamble. I didn’t fine it there but perhaps I’m not using the correct spelling, is it Yahooweeny or, Yahootawootee or, Yowamahinie?
pastahead,
Fair enough, I had a thought that this might have been the trigger that set your opinion against me. I was wrong, so be it.
I also felt it was something that I should clarify in case it was used against me in the future.
rna2dna
Silly rna2dna. The framers chose to express their intention that the U.S. be a Christian Nation by using the word “Sunday” in a single clause of the Constitution relating to the amount of time the president has to veto a bill before it becomes law without his signature.
Rusty,
Don’t forget the ‘year of our lord’ they used to date the constitution. The framers would certainly have used the Chinese calendar if they didn’t want this to be a Christian nation.
I haven’t figured out this ‘blogging stuff’ So for now :
YOu:
How did you come to this conclusion? What possible reason could I have to pick on those that were better or worse off than me?
Me:
WEll, I suppose we’re both bullies. I began to attack you for your ‘grammatics’ (ha ha). (that was actually meant for someone else. And it was supposed to be a grammatical mistake.) And well, I just thought you did such a good job at picking on my ‘grammar’ and phrase placement, that I let it pass. Glad you finally recognized what it was that ‘tipped’ me.
YOu:
Who are you and why are you attacking me? Are you an infallible psychoanalyst?
Me: NOt attacking you. Just passionate about the whole ‘socialization’ thing. I work my tail off in this department. I’m about to go after another blogger..only wish it were face to face. My body language says a whole lot more.
It’s all good. You seem to be an ‘intelligent’ person. I didn’t accuse you of being a bully a second ago. But the way you went at me for my poor ‘english’. wow..I almost cried:(
Wondering: have kids?
Thanks, DVan. The date thing plus the veto thing adds up to incontrovertible evidence, at least to people who believe the bible describes the Rapture.
The totally clueless Phreek thinks that kids drop out of school because of the quality of the school. What a clueless idiot the Phreek is.
pastahead,
Ok, so how does that make me a bully? Because I chose to defend my argument and my grasp of English? You and I must not have the same definition of “bully.”
Also, what do you mean by “that was meant for someone else”?
I have no problem with being passionate about anti-socia1ism, you are free to your opinions and I’m sure I would agree with at least some of them. But you were clearly attacking me, and you seemed to be doing it because of opinions that I do not hold.
This is just one example of a clear personal attack:
Further,
Actually, you did. Twice. I also don’t appreciate the jab at my intelligence. My intelligence is irrelevant here, but I’m confident that it’s higher than you’re thinking. I’m a Mensa candidate. I would prove it, but I can’t find a way to do that without giving out personal information.
Next time you want to make a passionate argument, make sure it’s not based on a straw-man.
To answer your question, no I don’t have children. I’m only 26 and don’t feel economically stable enough.
Finally, to make a block quote appear, type this:
[blockquote]QUOTE[/blockquote]
But replace [] with less than and greater than signs. Don’t misspell blockquote or forget the forward slash.
Here’s a better example of how to make block quotes:
http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_blockquote.asp
I made a mistake:
But you didn’t say socia1ism, you said socialization. Everything else I said still fits though.
Rusty:
I’m sorry, Rusty, but you’re sadly mistaken. By including “Sunday” in the Constitution, the framers were clearly intending the US to be a Norse-gods based country.
Sunday: Day of the Sun.
Monday: Day of the Moon.
Tuesday: Tyr’s day.
Wednesday: Wodin’s day.
Thursday: Thor’s day.
Friday: Frige’s day.
Saturday: Saturn’s day.
Now, if they’d used Saturday, I guess we’d be a Roman-gods nation. Or are we supposed to be a Ra-based nation since we use Sunday?
But we can’t say Christian, because then they would have changed the name Sunday. Other non-English Romance languages use a variation of Dies Dominica (lord’s day), such as the Spanish day domingo.
So there.
Alatham,
You still haven’t answered my question. “What bothers you?”
Sorry for attacking you. Forgive me. Let’s move on.
Now, what bothers you?
And thanks for the blockquote info.
pastahead,
I already answered your question:
Also, apology accepted, thanks.
I should amend that to say this:
[Home schooling] necessarily leads to more children being strongly indoctrinated into intolerant beliefs. Provided there is no negative correlation between religiosity and home schooling.
If there is a large enough negative correlation then my worries in this regard are baseless.
Angel_of_Light,
Your description of why we are a Norse god-based country totally kicked ass. I guess 4-F phreedy will be converting to Odinism. Or maybe Onanism…?
Ahh…just read your first post of day.. Well, that rephrasing sounds a lot different from your original posting of ‘what bothers you’. Thanks for clearing that up. Now you see how that may have ‘provoked’me. And yes, I attacked your ‘opinion’ in defense of my own.
Now , I would say that I agree with you about parent having more control of what comes in through the window…and there being more religious home schoolers in our country… (I will research more on this ‘argument’ : I do believe there are more ‘secular’ homeschoolers than we know. if not now, they are on the rise. Freethinker, yes. Ashamed no. (I don’t believe I deserved that) Self-reflecting..perhaps I need a little work. (there, I didn’t have to be ashamed, but I admitted my faults. Not a bit ‘self-righteaous’) And I’m always doing that. And that’s what I teach my children. I don’t teach them to be ‘ashamed’ of themselves. Unless, of course , they would go around killing cats or people or raping…hmm
Well, I must say it has been nice arguing with you. (I’m learning a lot)
Now, I do not believe I attacked you in any way in this post. Let’s move on and try another approach. Sorry for the confusion on my end and trying to make your opinion mine. I’m not ‘ashamed’ of that. I’m regretful, perhaps. But ashamed just doesn’t seem the right word.
Gotta run. I not only have to defend myself with ‘like-minded’ people, I sill have those home schooling, bible thumpers on my tail! I will look into this argument further and get back to you if I find anything worth bringing to the post about(homeschool, exposure, socialization with all ‘walks of life’ , etc. )
Rna2Dna
Actually, YHWH can be found in this segment, but I found Allah in a more concentrated part, so that took precedence. Also, since most Americans don’t use the form YHWH as the recognized form of name usage for their god.
Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the
Angel Of Light
Good point about the Norse gods.
pastahead,
You’re right, I did phrase my original argument poorly, but I do think you were out of line to jump on my back so quickly. If there’s a thin line between being clear and being verbose, then I apologize for not even approaching that line originally.
I’d say you’re probably right, and with the recent promotion of intelligent design in schools, this is trend I would welcome.
Shame is like any other emotion. It’s certainly not appropriate all the time, but it should show up occasionally (since nobody is perfect).
I think we just have different standards for what constitutes “shame.” The dictionary is vague here:
The word “strong” is what’s throwing us here. You simply require more embarrassment before you’ll start calling it shame.
When you said that you never feel shame, I took that to mean that you never mistakes worthy of feeling embarrassed about. That was unrealistic of me and I’ll apologize for this as well.
I wonder if the common use of “shame” amongst the religious causes secular people to avoid using the word altogether? Similar to how “faith” used to be a useful word. “Faith” has been used in so many Equivocation fallacies* that it has lost its meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation_fallacy
Anywho, glad we got that cleared up. Take care.
Phree
dont worry if GOD doesnt want a kid to drop out God will not let him or her since GOD IS ALL POWERFULL. remember god is everywhere !!! LOL
Well…someone at least read the first part of the constitution…
Now, give me a good “secular” explanation why the “Constitution” would give the president the Christian Sabbath off?
And if they wanted to be a truly secular government, then why sign it “In the Year of Our Lord”?
A definite recognition of the Christian God.
And don’t use the lame argument that, that’s just how they did it in those days, for that only strengthens my argument…