More Motivation to Home School
Here is a story that provides more motivation for those who are on the fence but still somewhat trust public schools and the NEA to educate their children.
In many places education is more like indoctrination. Take Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington, MA where the second grade children were read the pro homosexual “marriage” book King and King.
When children came home talking about the book some parents were livid, as one might expect. What were the principal’s and school board’s reaction?
Principal tells parents (1) they cannot opt out (2) there will be no parental notification despite state law and (3) “I will not guarantee that something like this won’t happen again”.
It seems on this and so many more issues the government believes it knows better than parents. For example, when and how children ought to be taught about sex, and whether children should have access to birthcontrol or have an abortion without their parents knowledge or consent. Of course, there are limits. Schools still will not give an aspirin or bandaid without parental consent.
.jpg)
Check out a really cool new Pro-LIFE website for this generation – http://www.Deathroe.com
For everyone born after Jan 22,1973- this is your place in the pro-life movement. Read what others feel about abortion and connect with other like-minded pro-life people in your area. Really cool Gear there also, free art downloads, crazy pro-abort quotes, and plenty of research info for papers. Also located on My Space, make it a friend if you have a My Space page: http://www.myspace.com/deathroesurvivor
On Xanga – http://www.xanga.com/DeathRoeSurvivors
Comment by Life Dynamics — April 26, 2006 @ 9:22 AM
If Lexington, MA schools are organized like suburban NY schools, then the parents can answer this school board–by voting them out of office. They can also vote down their district’s budget.
Having said that, if the NEA continues to support these divisive initiatives in the name of “diversity” then they shouldn’t be surprised to find themselves marginalized. Let’s see how much help families will give them when their members need it.
Comment by A Holy Fool — April 26, 2006 @ 7:24 PM
The sentiment to homeschool is being expressed in California too, as we face SB 1437 “Expansive Homosexual Doctine in Public Schools” and SB1441 Special Rights for Homosexuals” For many, this would be the straw that breaks the camels back. As there is a plethora of non-NEA compliant cirricula available, it will probably happen for parents already on the edge.
To learn more about the social engineering by special interest group who use our children to advance their agendas, google
capitol resource institute.
The secular humanist agenda specifically targets children as the best way to “transform society.” Any parent who reads their children’s textbooks already sees the anti-Christian, pro-diversity/multicultural bias. But you don’t have to be a Christian to be offended. The revisionist history is ascendant as pro-radical feminist/men-mocking agendas can be found too…
As California ranks in the bottom rungs of schools in the USA, one wonders how much more a parent can stand…?
Comment by denise martin — April 26, 2006 @ 7:57 PM
If Lexington, MA schools are organized like suburban NY schools, then the parents can answer this school board–by voting them out of office.
They are. Yet they haven’t voted them out. That’s the funny thing about this — Lexington is a posh, very liberal town. The parents involved with this case, I think, are in a pretty small minority.
Comment by $!# — April 27, 2006 @ 9:12 AM
Gay Marriage is legal in MA. How can the public school not teach about it?
As for Education in CA, its low rung has more to do with having to try and teach in over 200 languages than any “gay agenda”.
Poor Christianists, the more people start to treat gay people AS people, the more prejudiced and bigoted their pronouncements sound.
But go and home-school your children. Gay people will still exist when they leave their little bubbles, as will your gay children, unless you have driven them to suicide.
Comment by Patrick (gryph) — May 2, 2006 @ 2:23 PM
Gay Marriage is legal in MA. How can the public school not teach about it?
So are abortion and pornography; legal does not mean morally licit. There are many harmful practices that our permissive society has deemed not worthy of legislating against and sometimes even promoting. This does not mean that public schools have the right to usurp parental rights and indoctrinate impressionable children into accepting practices that parents recognize to be harmful.
Poor Christianists, the more people start to treat gay people AS people, the more prejudiced and bigoted their pronouncements sound.
Patrick, as usual your upside down view of the world places irony in much of what you say. I suppose it is the tempter’s way of attacking the truth by turning it around. Your claims are much like the abortion lobby accusing prolifer’s of hate speech for saying that abortion is the killing of an innocent unborn. The hate rather is a projection of the abortion advocates’ feelings when they are presented the truth, back onto the person who speaks it. This I suspect is the phenomenon at work here. Christians are accused of hate, who profess the truth the real dignity of the human person and encourage those who suffer from (and succumb to) SSA to recognize who and what they really are and that their innate dignity does not came from a falsely irenic recognition of their disordered attraction as legitimate but from their creation in the image and likeness of God. A dignity which they mask when they treat themselves and others as objects of consumption. While not against nature, this same disordered consumption applies to those men and women who do likewise to each other in out of wedlock intercourse.
But go and home-school your children. Gay people will still exist when they leave their little bubbles, as will your gay children, unless you have driven them to suicide.
Cancer, bipolar disorder, and pyromania also “exist” but that does not mean we must embrace disorder as an alternative existence. Rather, we do what we can to treat the disorder and love those who suffer from them. Suicide is a great problem among those who suffer from SSA, but it is not because society refuses to accept their disorder. In fact, the suicide problem exists, at rates well beyond the norm, even in very permissive societies where SSA is even extolled as one of the greatest of virtues. The suicide problem exists because SSA is an affective disorder and any affective disorder left untreated will inevitably spiral out of control.
Comment by David — May 2, 2006 @ 4:10 PM
Errr… No. The reason we get so upset is because we feel that you are attacking our family. How would you feel if someone verbally insulted and attacked your wife in public? And then told everyone that you were probably molesting your own children and tried to take them away from you? Or that the worst thing in world would be for your own children to grow up and turn out “like you”, to be gay or lesbian? Even when 99.9999999% of gay people come from straight parents?
The reason for the high intensity of emotions is plain to see, once you are willing to see us as people and families rather than a disorder or behavior.
But Christians don’t want to do that, do they? They define real flesh and blood people down to “behaviors” or a mental illness (SSA) or disorders.
It’s dehumanizing, and makes us into a faceless enemy, which is always the first step that people take when they want to attack other people. Make them as unlike yourself as possible, so you can’t empathize with them when you twist the knife into their stomachs.
Isn’t that the first step you are taking David? Re-read your words and look at how clinical and scientific you start to sound whoever the subject of gay people comes up. And the most interesting thing David is that you always attempt to rely on science as justification for your prejudices, rather than the Bible or Church teachings and edicts, etc. Perhaps you suspect deep down that Jesus might not approve of your thoughts after all.
You dehumanize us David in order to justify attacking us. But there are real flesh and blood people that you are hurting. Real families that you are destroying.
Nevertheless I do know that the majority of Christians don’t want to round us up and put us into concentration camps.
But I also know that Christians want do to keep us out of schools, jobs, churches, the Government, books, television, movies, local communities, recognition under or justice under the law, and even out of cemeteries, because these are exactly the things that we constantly see Christians on the front page of the newspapers trying to do every day.
Look at the Yahoo news “full coverage” section on gay and lesbians and you will see new stories describing Christians trying to do exactly the things described above every single day of the week.
Christians even want to keep us out of, of all things, “fairytales” if you can believe it.
Christians don’t want to kill us, they just want to wipe out any knowledge of us in the first place. To marginalize us out of existence. Look at the “Defense of Marriage” acts. They have no other purpose but to prevent gay people from marrying each other. But they can’t even use the words “homosexual or gay” in their defining language.To do even that little would be to acknowledge that we exist to begin with, as a people, which is the idea that Christians want above all else, to stomp out. But you may eventually realize that you can’t wipe out the idea without wiping out the people.
So frankly, I think a concentration camp is a far more honest approach. At least Hitler had the guts to say what was on most Germans minds at the time. Get rid of the Jews. Christians want to get rid of the Homosexuals. There is no denying it. Christians want us to go away and not exist. They would love it if they never had to hear the word “homosexual” again. Complete annihilation of our existence.
“Defense of Marriage”, “Traditional Family Values” and the pseudo-intellectualism on this blog, etc., and are just PR campaigns for sin of the vilest kind.
Comment by Patrick (gryph) — May 4, 2006 @ 9:03 PM
You dehumanize us David in order to justify attacking us.
Patrick, I understand that you view things through very colored lenses because you are so invested in a particular lifestyle. However, if you reread my posts more closely and honestly you will see that my emphasis is on the real humanity of those who suffer from SSA but who, when they give into their disorder, are the ones who end up, ironically, dehumanizing themselves. This is apparent from the affective problems they experience as a group. Rather, I have to say that a more honest reading of both of our posts will show that the ad hominem attacks come from your direction. However, you are free to provide a litany of excerpts from my posts demonstrating how I have dehumanized you if you can find them.
But they can’t even use the words “homosexual or gay†in their defining language.
I do not use these terms because they are loaded terms these days, and the latter is primarily intended to give ontological status to an affective disorder as well as justify a problematic lifestyle. It is clear that you interpret how you feel into who you are, but there is no rational justification for doing so. Revealed truth, natural law and empirical data from the medical and sociological sciences all confirm the obvious. Human beings are made only as male and female. Only the complementarity of men and women can be a fruitful one-flesh union. This fruitfulness is ordered to marriage. One cannot, in Kantian fashion, separate and isolate aspects of this one-flesh union. Sex is ordered to procreation and to try to emulate some parts of it in an unnatural way (and it only takes common sense devoid of emotionally invested rationalization to see that it is unnatural) becomes dehumanizing because to act in this way is in contradiction to that for which we were created.
And the most interesting thing David is that you always attempt to rely on science as justification for your prejudices, rather than the Bible or Church teachings and edicts, etc.
Patrick, you will have to go back and read my series again on Sex and Human Personhood.
Perhaps you suspect deep down that Jesus might not approve of your thoughts after all.
If I think anything uncharitable He certainly would not approve. Being a sinful man, this certainly happens to me from time to time. However, I understand that you are looking to revisionist personal interpretations of Scripture to justify your SSA oriented actions. However, these interpretations come from Christians who reject Apostolic Tradition (at least when it contradicts their desires) and do not accept the authority structure maintained through Apostolic succession as Jesus established it approximately two millenia ago. There is no chance that these personal eisegetical interpretations, completely cutoff from the faith handed on by the Apostles when they attempt to justify homosexual acts, have any merit.
So frankly, I think a concentration camp is a far more honest approach.
This type of diatribe demonstrates more about the one venting then it says anything about the object of his screed.
They would love it if they never had to hear the word “homosexual†again. Complete annihilation of our existence.
For the first part you are most correct. However, this certainly would not annihilate your existence any more than it would annhiliate the existence of someone who suffers from cancer if cancer were to be wiped out.
Patrick, if you will try to step back from your emotional attachment to your condition (which I understand might seem impossible to you right now) you will see that there is no logical justification for supposing that SSA is an ontological state of existence. Rather, it is simply justified based upon feelings and inclinations. Not speaking out about the damage it does would be irresponsible and sinful. If my intentions were as you suggest I certainly would not be spending my time responding to your rants. Instead of accusing those with whom you disagree of vile intentions perhaps you might try applying a bit of charity in interpreting their intentions.
Try reading this with an open heart and you will find that the Catholic position on SSA is not one of hatred but one of care for the person suffering from SSA and concern over the damage SSA does to people and society.
Comment by David — May 5, 2006 @ 9:40 AM