Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Am I missing something, or is it not the parents who should be providing for their children instead of the government?
I join the others above. You have a rep plus one for this one, Westerner!
Rhetorical query as it might have been, it hits the nail on the head. Another
The birds are coming home to roost and it is not pretty.
There is not much I can add to a lot of what some others have said, but the real problem is rooted in this ever-more embraced outlook of "we", in a collective sense. That is to say, in this context, intentionally or not, embraces the ultimate end of that government (in whatever regard, education, etc) has the responsibility. Unfortunately, that is exactly the way all too many have become conditioned to think.
There is no such thing as "we" in providing and assuring the future of a child. At least, not in the sense of Hillary's "It Takes a Village". No, it takes a parent and a community of organic nature which backs up that parent.
Bluntly put?
"We" don't fail "our" kids. Because those kids are not communal nor of governments prodgeny. I can only fail my own kids. As can anyone else. Singular and direct.
"We" don't fail "our" kids. Because those kids are not communal nor of governments prodgeny. I can only fail my own kids. As can anyone else. Singular and direct.
But after the parents have failed to protect or provide for their children, what do you propose a civilized society do then? Abandon the children to starvation, homelessness and/or abuse? Have you thought through the consequences of what you are arguing?
But after the parents have failed to protect or provide for their children, what do you propose a civilized society do then? Abandon the children to starvation, homelessness and/or abuse? Have you thought through the consequences of what you are arguing?
For one thing, a people that abidicate their responsibility to their own children and give in to the emotive phrase "our" children (in the collective sense) are no longer free nor even civilized.
The "consequence" is the end result of what it seems you are advocating.
Why is that those proponents of "it take a villiage" always present the worst case scenario? And, really, ridiculous.
Sorry, but I will not play into that one. Tell me the child in particular you are speaking of rather than just some abstract "those."
I am a teacher. I am not into it for the money, but to help kids. I have my reasons and don't expect any special considerations for it. In fact, as is in my profile, PLEASE don't hold it again me! LOL
Anyway, name the children -- just one -- who has died in this country as a result of starvation?
Tell me the name of one who is homeless and I bet it wont take me but about 48 hours to get in touch with the right authorities to put things in motion to find them a home.
Abuse? Let me tell you something. I lost my own beloved grandson to cruel abuse (it is a high-profile case in Kansas), and I intend to devote the rest of my life to seeing that abused children are properly protected, and justice be done.
Anything else you want to talk about so far as me not absorbing the reality of my position?
Look. We ALL know there are bad parents. But a free society has to proceed from the foundation of that the parents know best. Not "child-experts"...and for damn sure, not "government".
I see the problems in public schools everywhere, not only Texas, as being in great part: teachers union (NEA) allowing bad teachers to continue teaching, school children being granted the same rights as adults (teachers can't discipline them), both parents working (if there are two parents...) so there's no one at home to teach children basic right from wrong, and government mandated freedom from religion, leaving our children with no moral compass. We homeschooled our children, which meant giving up a second paycheck and a fair bit of sacrifice, but thank God we did it. They were far ahead of public school graduates when they entered college, and now have good jobs and a bright future. Most children in the US are raised by day care centers, TV and each other. The result is painfully evident all around us.
And BTW, what does Mexico have to do with this? It is OUR responsibility to raise our children up right. It's not a money problem, the US spends more on public "education" than any other country. If you love your children, get them out of government schools.
The problem with home schooling is lack of socialization and inability to participate in the sports curriculum at the schools, assuming that the home schooler is himself/herself educated. Having your child being able to get along with a child who has a different ethnic and political background, how to deal with different styles from different teachers, etc... Many people that home school don't think about that, only about protecting their child from learning evolution... Face it, that's why 99% home school.
Then, imagine trying to apply to an ivy league college saying you were home schooled. I guess if the SAT/ACT scores were good enough, maybe they may accept you. But usually they want you to have shown some kind of involvement with a school community and you don't get that from home schooling. I've had these discussions with neighbors who home school and they never acknowledge these deficiencies. Then their kid gets into UT or something and starts drinking weekly and they blame the "liberal college atmosphere". No, that is what happens when you shield your child from any outside influence whatsoever. When they finally get to college, they go berserk because they are inexperienced with decision making and peer pressure.
Well you wanted Perrry and you got him....He wouldnt release this years projected budget shortfall until he won re-election and touted his so called rainy day fund which he refuses to use. Now true numbers are released and we are in deep @#$%....he refuses to use the rainy day fund to keep Education funding as it is currently and proposes a fast track bill to pay for sonograms and counsleing for every woman in Texas that wants an abortion. That sounds like a fiscal responsible policy....right? republicans can talk spending cuts but then spend on things that infringe on my rights? All the while saying get Government out of my life. Stop telling people who to marry and dictating private matters like family planning and we may believe in ur bs!
Yep.
You know the biggest irony of it all is that Perry is proposing a giant massive "socialized" healthcare with the sonograms and the like trying to convince women to not have abortions (yet saying he's opposed to socialized healthcare), yet once those babies are born, they will be scorned by the Republicans from birth to death and if they or their parents seek any aid they will be bashed, just as the people on here do. So the women are supposed to have babies even though they have no means to support them and the government won't do anything to help them out. That is the biggest irony of it all.
Like they say, Republicans only care about you before you're born, then they don't give a d*mn about you.
The problem with home schooling is lack of socialization and inability to participate in the sports curriculum at the schools, assuming that the home schooler is himself/herself educated. Having your child being able to get along with a child who has a different ethnic and political background, how to deal with different styles from different teachers, etc... Many people that home school don't think about that, only about protecting their child from learning evolution... Face it, that's why 99% home school.
Then, imagine trying to apply to an ivy league college saying you were home schooled. I guess if the SAT/ACT scores were good enough, maybe they may accept you. But usually they want you to have shown some kind of involvement with a school community and you don't get that from home schooling. I've had these discussions with neighbors who home school and they never acknowledge these deficiencies. Then their kid gets into UT or something and starts drinking weekly and they blame the "liberal college atmosphere". No, that is what happens when you shield your child from any outside influence whatsoever. When they finally get to college, they go berserk because they are inexperienced with decision making and peer pressure.
Where do you come up with this stuff?
I am a public school teacher and love my job as much as anybody (although I might be in the soup line next year, as it is! LOL), but again, other than your "talks with neighbors" how do you arrive at the stats indicating home schooled kids are deprived in terms of either academics or socialization?
It is not "shielding" a child. This is a canard and strawman. You seem to present home-schooled children as like those cloistered into a nutty religious cult or something. On the contrary, home schooling really means they get the instruction at home (often on their own as their parents work) and have to pass certain tests (not too dis-similar to a GED, at worst) to get their HS degree. Nothing more sinister than that.
Otherwise? They mix with their peers, go to the mall, sneak a smoke and a beer, and are not much different than any other kids.
You know the biggest irony of it all is that Perry is proposing a giant massive "socialized" healthcare with the sonograms and the like trying to convince women to not have abortions (yet saying he's opposed to socialized healthcare), yet once those babies are born, they will be scorned by the Republicans from birth to death and if they or their parents seek any aid they will be bashed, just as the people on here do. So the women are supposed to have babies even though they have no means to support them and the government won't do anything to help them out. That is the biggest irony of it all.
Like they say, Republicans only care about you before you're born, then they don't give a d*mn about you.
The irony being if the Republicans actually supported welfare more, and gave those women resources about how they would help them after their baby was born, they would have a better case for getting women to go through with their pregnancies...
But we all know this is a wedge issue and Republicans aren't concerned with lowering abortion rates, just using the issue to get re-elected. I just wish the Christians would see this. They are being manipulated for their vote.
The irony being if the Republicans actually supported welfare more, and gave those women resources about how they would help them after their baby was born, they would have a better case for getting women to go through with their pregnancies...
But we all know this is a wedge issue and Republicans aren't concerned with lowering abortion rates, just using the issue to get re-elected. I just wish the Christians would see this. They are being manipulated for their vote.
How much of your own money do you contribute to such causes as you advocate? Just asking.
I am a public school teacher and love my job as much as anybody (although I might be in the soup line next year, as it is! LOL), but again, other than your "talks with neighbors" how do you arrive at the stats indicating home schooled kids are deprived in terms of either academics or socialization?
It is not "shielding" a child. This is a canard and strawman. You seem to present home-schooled children as like those cloistered into a nutty religious cult or something. On the contrary, home schooling really means they get the instruction at home (often on their own as their parents work) and have to pass certain tests (not too dis-similar to a GED, at worst) to get their HS degree. Nothing more sinister than that.
Otherwise? They mix with their peers, go to the mall, sneak a smoke and a beer, and are not much different than any other kids.
Good god, why these horror stories?
BTW -- Do you have any kids of your own?
Why do you ask if I have a child? Are you trying to discredit me? Well, guess what, that won't work because I do have a child, and there would be no way I'd ever have him home schooled.
About the sports, I asked the coach at our school if they accepted home schooled children into the basketball, football, baseball, and track programs, and he said "No, unless your child attends the school, he cannot participate in the sports at our school."
I see the home schooled kids everyday playing around the neighborhood, running in the streets, etc... I keep thinking "Oh is this the next generation?" because I just don't see where they are getting the same kind of regimand that my son is getting.
If your child interacts with hundreds of children daily at school, he/she will be able to interact better with others than one who only interacts with his family (how large it may be). He will only be used to one teaching style, the one his parents deploy, and will not have "gotten out" much as he's in a home all day.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
