NationStates Jolt Archive

Last night I was watching Newsnight on BBC2, as I usually do on a night. They were doing a piece on Christian home schooling and the intent behind such. To be honest I was dumbfounded.

This is an Article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/4311709.stm) from BBC news written in March that touches upon similar issues but isn't quite as graphic about what the actual beliefs are of these people as the report I saw. However I'm struggling to find any articles specifically from the report I saw lastnight where the people interviewed were very forthright.

Here are some extracts from the news article.

"Mr Farris, a constitutional lawyer and political activist, established the college with a very clear aim: "To prepare Christian men and women who will lead our nation and shape our culture with timeless Biblical values and fidelity to the spirit of the American founding."

"If we are going to have our values reflected in our culture, we've got to train our kids in those values and train them for leadership," Mr Farris said. "And so this is a very concerted effort to train top leaders.""

I'm scared.
This issue was addressed lastnight only it was put forth in a very different manner. This issue was brought up when in a discussion with a man and his wife, and according to them it isn't quite as equal as "To prepare Christian men and women who will lead our nation......", they simply stipulated that they are raising men to lead and women to support these men in achieving their goals of leadership. But should either way be the case this is jingoism to the extreme as it doesn't even get past state boarders before it foriegn policies get far too belligerent.

"Christians do have something to say in politics," said Mr Farris. "We have as much right as anybody else to speak our mind and assert our values."

I agree, you have a right to assert your values to your own life.

"If we are going to have our values reflected in our culture, we've got to train our kids in those values and train them for leadership," Mr Farris said. "And so this is a very concerted effort to train top leaders."

Leadership of whom? Why does the installation of your own values into your own culture necessitate leadership over all people?

"If other people feel threatened by it, they've got to get out there and mobilise their folks to be well-trained, serving internships, getting to Washington and so forth."

That isn't exactly a mutual "peace loving" attitude I detect here. Just a little provocative if you ask me.
Won't they reprsent all members of their country should they be elected?

Is it just me or do these people need putting into their place, which they're entitled to. They just aren't entitled to decide where everyone else's place is.
Anyone else worried? I know I am and I don't even live in the U.S., I just see how it would effect me and so many other nations if the religious right gets any greater stronghold in politics above what it already has.

I'd particularly like to hear the opinions of those in the U.S. about this because I know there are well rounded individuals that live there and it would probably make me a bit less worried about the possible directions that the U.S. could take in the near and distant future. As this really does seem like a distinct possibility and just as greater threat to true freedom and civil liberty as any other threat there is at the moment, even if not being as violent.

Great thread mate. Personally I think this sort of thing should be stopped, it's pritty much brainwashing to eb honest.

Great thread mate. Personally I think this sort of thing should be stopped, it's pritty much brainwashing to eb honest.
Question is how. I oppose Nazism and that being taught to children by their parents, but certain parts of it, like women being demoted to birth-machines, harsh immigration and citizenship laws, and a stop of abortion aren't illegal opinions. Stuff like that needs to be stopped by public action and not by making it illegal...

"'Educating' America's Christian Right............ Makes this Brit a little worried."

You're worried?? Shit, dude! I LIVED with one for many, many years! Why do you think I'm so happy? LOL!

Great thread mate. Personally I think this sort of thing should be stopped, it's pritty much brainwashing to eb honest.
Most education is, to one extent or the other. A certain percentage of it is government-mandated curriculum, but the bulk of education involves socialisation, based on the belief system of the community. If that community happens to be particularly religious, (or atheistic, or purple-loving), that tends to be reflected in the schools. When a family's or community's values aren't reflected ENOUGH for their liking, they tend to homeschool. Unless you want to start taking away people right to mould the education of their children (these kids still have to learn government-mandated curriculum), there isn't much you can do.

It's a bit open and aggressive, but this sort of thing has actually been going on for a while. It's just now, there seems to be political support in the US for these kinds of values, and if there is a push to take political advantage of that support, we're going to see fundamentalism become more mainstream *shudders*.

Thankfully we have a constitution in place that usually keeps religion and government separate. This limits the damage these homeschooled fundies can do if they happen to get elected. Unfortunately it's not foolproof as shown by the continued existence of Bush's "faith based initiatives".

That isn't exactly a mutual "peace loving" attitude I detect here. Just a little provocative if you ask me.
Won't they reprsent all members of their country should they be elected?

Is it just me or do these people need putting into their place, which they're entitled to. They just aren't entitled to decide where everyone else's place is.
Anyone else worried? I know I am and I don't even live in the U.S., I just see how it would effect me and so many other nations if the religious right gets any greater stronghold in politics above what it already has.

I'd particularly like to hear the opinions of those in the U.S. about this because I know there are well rounded individuals that live there and it would probably make me a bit less worried about the possible directions that the U.S. could take in the near and distant future. As this really does seem like a distinct possibility and just as greater threat to true freedom and civil liberty as any other threat there is at the moment, even if not being as violent.
1. No, they would not represent all members of their country if elected because they believe that any values other than their own are wrong - in some cases, actually evil - and they will seek, at the least, to contain those by law. Their political statements and actions to date support this, but if you call them on it, you will be attacked as being anti-Christian and trying to deny them their rights. They claim to be tolerant of others because it is their duty as Christians to love sinners (not too condescending :rolleyes: ), but their "tolerance" tends to be predicated on the "sinners" converting to their Christian ways -- thus the popular extremist view that homosexuals can be "cured" through re-education, and that will be their way of "helping" such people.

2. It's not just you.

3. Haven't you noticed all the god-themed threads on this forum? Who do you think is ranting away on those? It's us vs. them, baby.

PS: I'm an American, but a sane one, in my opinion. ;)

I don't actually see the problem. Yes I homeschool my kids, and yes I am raising them in a "Christian home".
I went to public school, where I was told that Christians are idiots, and that fetuses aren't babies, and that we should all just vote for Ralph Nader because making money is wrong.

Yeah right. I live in a free country, I should be able to educate my children the way I see fit. Christains aren't really going to be able to "take over the nation" there are too many non-christians who vote. Besides most of my teachers didn't do what I would consider even a basic job of teaching anyway. I had a US History teacher that thought that Betty Crocker made the first American flag, that there were 52 states and that Alaska belonged to Canada. I also had a geometry teacher that thought that theorems were just suggestions and weren't always true, and didn't understand why 2 points are always colinear even if the picture didn't show a line.
I had an english teacher who thought that your and you're were the same thing and that synonym meant that it rhymed
I don't want my kids to have to go to school all week and then be stuck studying nights and weekends just to get the barest of an education.
I have the money and the time to spend making sure they get a good education so why should I be denied the privilage just because I am a Christian?

I don't actually see the problem. Yes I homeschool my kids, and yes I am raising them in a "Christian home".
I went to public school, where I was told that Christians are idiots, and that fetuses aren't babies, and that we should all just vote for Ralph Nader because making money is wrong.
Then you went to a bad school, mopst school arn't and should not be like that, certainly mine arn't.

Yeah right. I live in a free country, I should be able to educate my children the way I see fit. Christains aren't really going to be able to "take over the nation" there are too many non-christians who vote. Besides most of my teachers didn't do what I would consider even a basic job of teaching anyway. I had a US History teacher that thought that Betty Crocker made the first American flag, that there were 52 states and that Alaska belonged to Canada. I also had a geometry teacher that thought that theorems were just suggestions and weren't always true, and didn't understand why 2 points are always colinear even if the picture didn't show a line.

Again you are assuming that all teachers are fools, now maybe they are/qhere in the US however long ago you went to school, but they ain't like that in britian. There is a reason that kids should go to a state school you know, it keeps everything equal and fair. And it means that they get a good education. Schools shouold be compeletly secular, not favoring any religion at all but not attacking any religion eather.

I don't want my kids to have to go to school all week and then be stuck studying nights and weekends just to get the barest of an education.
I have the money and the time to spend making sure they get a good education so why should I be denied the privilage just because I am a Christian?
A) Thats so they egt a good education, homework teachers you a lot of things you know. And I doubt they get the barest of an education.

B) I'm not debating your right, I'm just saying that people who set up there own PRivate shcool, lets point that out again, this is a Private school (Not home education) that is based on, to be honest, complete crap. I don't know about the US but over here you can't just set up a school and start teaching.

I don't actually see the problem. Yes I homeschool my kids, and yes I am raising them in a "Christian home".
I went to public school, where I was told that Christians are idiots, and that fetuses aren't babies, and that we should all just vote for Ralph Nader because making money is wrong.

Yeah right. I live in a free country, I should be able to educate my children the way I see fit. Christains aren't really going to be able to "take over the nation" there are too many non-christians who vote. Besides most of my teachers didn't do what I would consider even a basic job of teaching anyway. I had a US History teacher that thought that Betty Crocker made the first American flag, that there were 52 states and that Alaska belonged to Canada. I also had a geometry teacher that thought that theorems were just suggestions and weren't always true, and didn't understand why 2 points are always colinear even if the picture didn't show a line.
I had an english teacher who thought that your and you're were the same thing and that synonym meant that it rhymed
I don't want my kids to have to go to school all week and then be stuck studying nights and weekends just to get the barest of an education.
I have the money and the time to spend making sure they get a good education so why should I be denied the privilage just because I am a Christian?
Where the fuck did you go to school? I just want to make sure that I stay well away from that community.

And to bring another perspective into this...I'm a teacher. I'm also a rabid atheist and lefty, and I plan on homeschooling my kids. Why? Because I see first-hand how stretched teachers are, how kids inevitably fall through the cracks, and how the education system simply can not remediate or enrich education for students who are not just 'average'.

As a parent, I'm teaching my kids my values anyway...and part of my value system is letting them know that other people think differently than we do, and that's okay...they will be able to choose what to think and believe, but they will also quite clearly know what my family's value system is. They can reject it if they so choose.

Homeschooling varies. Some use it as an excuse to keep their kids around the farm as help, and the education is neglected. Some parents are very diligent, and access the wealth of support and resources out there for homeschools. Some may be religious or political brainwashing. A bit more oversight might be necessary. Nonetheless, it's a wonderful option for those parents who have the resources to take an active role in their child's education. My children are already learning Cree, Spanish and French, as well as piano and guitar and dance. Not all of this instruction is done by me, and I access community resources. My kids currently have and will continue to have a lot of interaction with others as they grow up (one is 3 1/2, the other is just 1 1/2, so they're still babies:)), so don't think that all homeschoolers are isolated social freaks.

If I were Muslim, or Hindu, or Mormon, or really deep into native spirituality, I'd like having homeschooling as an option too. Public education can not always meet everyone's needs.

Those of us on the East Coast are worried as well, considering every once in a while some religious figure from the south would get up on his pulpit and talk about how evil and immoral New York is. And this was BEFORE 9/11.

I never understood that.

Just so you know, while this doesn't exactly "scare me" any more than a hippy raising kids scares me, I do agree with the general feel of the post. I just have to ask you one thing, though:

I agree, you have a right to assert your values to your own life.

Leadership of whom? Why does the installation of your own values into your own culture necessitate leadership over all people?

Are you an anarchist? Because the assertion of one's values over the people and the leadership over all people by following one's values are concepts held dear by pretty much every politician, and are kind of at the foundation of democracy - or government, period, for that matter. It's not a Bible thumper thing like you make it out to be. They just seem to be being honest about it.

Once again, I can't stand religion having a role in politics, I just wanted to question the odd way you responded in those two quotes.

Where the fuck did you go to school? I just want to make sure that I stay well away from that community.
Also stay away from inner-city or reservation schools. Generally the teachers are so damn busy keeping up with behavioural issues, that actually getting into a full lesson becomes a thing to celebrate. It all depends where you live...and to the person saying that education is better in Britain? I reiterate...it depends where you live. A colleague of mine taught in a school in London where the kids burned the school down...not once, but twice in a year. Behaviour issues ran that school...and is it any wonder parents were trying to get their kids into other schools?

But yes, this is a bit off topic...as homeschooling is not quite the same as private schools.

Great thread mate. Personally I think this sort of thing should be stopped, it's pritty much brainwashing to eb honest.

Yeah, but you don't really know anything about the subject, so...

Where the fuck did you go to school? I just want to make sure that I stay well away from that community.

On behalf of that community, we're perfectly happy staying away from you as well. That's why we've built a special place for you to go. It's called "prison".

On behalf of that community, we're perfectly happy staying away from you as well. That's why we've built a special place for you to go. It's called "prison".
This is out of line.

Edit: we seem to be experiencing NS timeslip again. :(

I'm not sure what it is you would "stop"... I guess you would stop children being raised by their parents so they could be raised by the state.

i dont really see the problem here. if people want to be hardcore christian and reaise their kids hardcore christian, isnt that their business? and dont they have as much a right to share their point of view as we have to ignore it? its not like theyre going to take over the world, theyre a fairly small minority in the states,who just happen to get a lot of press, and i think a lot of people fail to realize that. so, theres no need to spazz out over some people with whom we dont agree. theyre no threat. at all.

On behalf of that community, we're perfectly happy staying away from you as well. That's why we've built a special place for you to go. It's called "prison".
Been there, done that, got the orange boxer shorts.

Anyway, I don't see why you're all that angry. The statement was made because of the sorry state of the educational system there, and it's not even your community mentioned in the post, it was Smunkeeville's. Lighten up dude, you're comming off as highly defensive to the point of paranoia IMHO.

Yeah, but if they were gone, I wouldn't miss them either.
What a kind, tolerant point of view.

Edit: TO HELL WITH THE TIMESLIP, DAMN YOU JOLT!!!!

i dont really see the problem here. if people want to be hardcore christian and reaise their kids hardcore christian, isnt that their business? and dont they have as much a right to share their point of view as we have to ignore it? its not like theyre going to take over the world, theyre a fairly small minority in the states,who just happen to get a lot of press, and i think a lot of people fail to realize that. so, theres no need to spazz out over some people with whom we dont agree. theyre no threat. at all.
Yeah, but if they were gone, I wouldn't miss them either.

What a kind, tolerant point of view.
Another timeslip... And there I was, thinking you were talking about a relapse before...

Where the fuck did you go to school? I just want to make sure that I stay well away from that community.
inner city school in Oklahoma, to put it in perspective though my senior year we were ranked best school in the district because of high test scores (I would have really hated to go to one on the bottom of the list, my friend did he said in math class all they did was word finds)
There were 74 kids in my english class and more in my math class. I didn't go to school but 9 days junior and senior year because I was working 80-90 hours a week to support myself and still graduated in the top 5% of my class (with a 98% in all my classes) I pretty much had to educate myself. I am still learning things I should have known years ago. (it's hard to catch up) I am highly intelligent (if I do say so myself, but I don't usually) so you can see how bored I was in school. I tried to enroll my 4 year old in preK but she got in trouble the first week for reading during recess (because it made the other kids "feel dumb") so what else am I supposed to do but homeschool? don't know.

I tried to enroll my 4 year old in preK but she got in trouble the first week for reading during recess (because it made the other kids "feel dumb") so what else am I supposed to do but homeschool? don't know.Goodness. At my school a girl was able to read and write rather well in my Kindergarden class. She didn't get in trouble, though, she got praised and sent to 1st grade.

What a kind, tolerant point of view.

Edit: TO HELL WITH THE TIMESLIP, DAMN YOU JOLT!!!!Hey, I'm not out to get them. In fact, I try to avoid hardcore Christians when I can which isn't too hard considering where I live. I've survived New York in the 80's, Kosovo and for a short time, lived in relative peace before 9/11. So when I see people stirring the pot with a shit stick, I tend to get "kind" and "tolerant".

Goodness. At my school a girl was able to read and write rather well in my Kindergarden class. She didn't get in trouble, though, she got praised and sent to 1st grade.
A major problem here has been the idea that peer groups must be kept together. Kids are rarely held back, even if they need it, and kids are rarely 'sent up' if they are ahead. The latter is really less of a problem than the former. What happens, is that kids who are behind, for whatever reason, a learning disorder perhaps, an illness that kept them out of school for a significant amount of time, whatever...they are passed up without the necessary skills, and the next teacher has to try to teach at their level as well as meeting the other students' needs. I've had a class with kids ranging from grade 1 - 6 levels (in grade 5). It's impossible to really address all their needs. If your kid needs remediation, or acceleration, it's more likely you can meet their specific needs in the home than hope it'll get dealt with in school.

I really get the feeling that at some point the people in the states are either going to fuck things up so terribly because of the right wing religious guys running things that they become a third world country.

Or they are going to experience a severe backlash in which religion will be banned from government altogehter.

Those of us on the East Coast are worried as well, considering every once in a while some religious figure from the south would get up on his pulpit and talk about how evil and immoral New York is. And this was BEFORE 9/11.

I never understood that.
[ puts on Billy Badass accent for best effect ] Tha's cause y'all got them gays and neegros a'runnin' things up thar, 'n all them nekkid wimmin runnin' 'round in them clubs 'n strip joints, 'n all them drugs with pushers sellin' 'em on ever' street-corner. Way ah heers it, New Yawk jus' the devil's playground, 'n none'a y'all even goes ta church. Ain't nuthin' but a flesh-pot, like Soddom 'n Gamoree, ah tell ya!

Ah'm commin' up next week.

I really get the feeling that at some point the people in the states are either going to fuck things up so terribly because of the right wing religious guys running things that they become a third world country.

I get that feeling, too. They are so focused on their religious agenda that, when they get into politics, they ignore all the practical stuff. They're self-destructive that way, which actually might not be such a bad thing for the rest of us. But I also get the feeling that their fucking up is going to include more wars along the way. That would be a bad thing for the rest of us.

I get that feeling, too. They are so focused on their religious agenda that, when they get into politics, they ignore all the practical stuff. They're self-destructive that way, which actually might not be such a bad thing for the rest of us. But I also get the feeling that their fucking up is going to include more wars along the way. That would be a bad thing for the rest of us.
Of course it's going to be a bad thing.

Who has all the nukes?

Of course it's going to be a bad thing.

Who has all the nukes?
Right now, quite a lot of countries have nukes that seem to be filling up with people who think they are immune to fall-out, either because they're so superior or because god will protect them.

And for the record, everybody, that's my issue -- I don't mind if people homeschool their kids, whether it's to ensure a better education or to indoctrinate them into the cult of their choice. What I mind is this deliberate program of religious training for world leadership. That starts with homeschooling, but it doesn't end there. There are whole "Christian" colleges and think tanks that are part of that movement, too. That's what the focus of that article was, imo.

I don't actually see the problem. Yes I homeschool my kids, and yes I am raising them in a "Christian home".
I went to public school, where I was told that Christians are idiots, and that fetuses aren't babies, and that we should all just vote for Ralph Nader because making money is wrong.

First, no school would have taught you that. I don't know (or care) when and where you went to school, But when I was in high school (Texas, in the 1980s) any teacher that strayed that far from the cirriculum would have found themselves in danger of losing their job. In college, yes, you might have heard that sort of thing. Too bad if it offended you, a lot of what you fundies say and do offends me. I have to live wit it, so do you.

Yeah right. I live in a free country, I should be able to educate my children the way I see fit. Christains aren't really going to be able to "take over the nation" there are too many non-christians who vote. Besides most of my teachers didn't do what I would consider even a basic job of teaching anyway. I had a US History teacher that thought that Betty Crocker made the first American flag, that there were 52 states and that Alaska belonged to Canada. I also had a geometry teacher that thought that theorems were just suggestions and weren't always true, and didn't understand why 2 points are always colinear even if the picture didn't show a line.
I had an english teacher who thought that your and you're were the same thing and that a synonym meant that it rhymed.

If you're not exaggerating, then your teachers were complete idiots.

I don't want my kids to have to go to school all week and then be stuck studying nights and weekends just to get the barest of an education.
I have the money and the time to spend making sure they get a good education so why should I be denied the privilage just because I am a Christian?

You're not being denied anything because you're a fundamentalist. Quit the "we're being oppressed" act. The school system in this country sucks, no matter what your religion. You want to teach your kids at home? Go right ahead, no one's stopping you. All the rest of us want is for you to stop trying to force your belief system on us. I don't dare what you believe, but don't expect me to have to believe it, too. BTW, I really resent you evangelicals and your arrogant insistance on calling yourselves simply christian, as if only you were christians, and no other denomination was. I have news for you: moderate Protestants, Orthodox, and yes, Catholics are christian, also.

Last night I was watching Newsnight on BBC2, as I usually do on a night. They were doing a piece on Christian home schooling and the intent behind such. To be honest I was dumbfounded.

This is an Article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/4311709.stm) from BBC news written in March that touches upon similar issues but isn't quite as graphic about what the actual beliefs are of these people as the report I saw. However I'm struggling to find any articles specifically from the report I saw lastnight where the people interviewed were very forthright.

Here are some extracts from the news article.

"Mr Farris, a constitutional lawyer and political activist, established the college with a very clear aim: "To prepare Christian men and women who will lead our nation and shape our culture with timeless Biblical values and fidelity to the spirit of the American founding."

"If we are going to have our values reflected in our culture, we've got to train our kids in those values and train them for leadership," Mr Farris said. "And so this is a very concerted effort to train top leaders.""

I'm scared.
This issue was addressed lastnight only it was put forth in a very different manner. This issue was brought up when in a discussion with a man and his wife, and according to them it isn't quite as equal as "To prepare Christian men and women who will lead our nation......", they simply stipulated that they are raising men to lead and women to support these men in achieving their goals of leadership. But should either way be the case this is jingoism to the extreme as it doesn't even get past state boarders before it foriegn policies get far too belligerent.

"Christians do have something to say in politics," said Mr Farris. "We have as much right as anybody else to speak our mind and assert our values."

I agree, you have a right to assert your values to your own life.

"If we are going to have our values reflected in our culture, we've got to train our kids in those values and train them for leadership," Mr Farris said. "And so this is a very concerted effort to train top leaders."

Leadership of whom? Why does the installation of your own values into your own culture necessitate leadership over all people?

"If other people feel threatened by it, they've got to get out there and mobilise their folks to be well-trained, serving internships, getting to Washington and so forth."

That isn't exactly a mutual "peace loving" attitude I detect here. Just a little provocative if you ask me.
Won't they reprsent all members of their country should they be elected?

Is it just me or do these people need putting into their place, which they're entitled to. They just aren't entitled to decide where everyone else's place is.
Anyone else worried? I know I am and I don't even live in the U.S., I just see how it would effect me and so many other nations if the religious right gets any greater stronghold in politics above what it already has.

I'd particularly like to hear the opinions of those in the U.S. about this because I know there are well rounded individuals that live there and it would probably make me a bit less worried about the possible directions that the U.S. could take in the near and distant future. As this really does seem like a distinct possibility and just as greater threat to true freedom and civil liberty as any other threat there is at the moment, even if not being as violent.


Whats your problem, I agree with these people. They make sense, we need to get rid of abortion, we need to make every country more conservative, and we can only do that through education and proving how wrong some ideologies are.

EDIT: Oh and by the way i am a Christian and I wish I had had an eductaion like thid, instead I ended up in an anti-Bush liberal place...

Whats your problem, I agree with these people. They make sense, we need to get rid of abortion, we need to make every country more conservative, and we can only do that through education and proving how wrong some ideologies are.

EDIT: Oh and by the way i am a Christian and I wish I had had an eductaion like thid, instead I ended up in an anti-Bush liberal place...
It's your kind of thinking that allows the states to be a bastillion of ignorance regarding science. 1 in 5 americans believe the sun orbits the earth, and it's stupid crap like this that doesn't help.

First, no school would have taught you that. I don't know (or care) when and where you went to school, But when I was in high school (Texas, in the 1980s) any teacher that strayed that far from the cirriculum would have found themselves in danger of losing their job. In college, yes, you might have heard that sort of thing. Too bad if it offended you, a lot of what you fundies say and do offends me. I have to live wit it, so do you.



If you're not exaggerating, then your teachers were complete idiots.



You're not being denied anything because you're a fundamentalist. Quit the "we're being oppressed" act. The school system in this country sucks, no matter what your religion. You want to teach your kids at home? Go right ahead, no one's stopping you. All the rest of us want is for you to stop trying to force your belief system on us. I don't dare what you believe, but don't expect me to have to believe it, too. BTW, I really resent you evangelicals and your arrogant insistance on calling yourselves simply christian, as if only you were christians, and no other denomination was. I have news for you: moderate Protestants, Orthodox, and yes, Catholics are christian, also.

Okay first, I know what happened and since you weren't there, you don't. Nobody listens when a student complains here about teachers straying from curriculum a parent has to complain and it had better be a parent with money (my parent didn't care, and even if she would have we didn't have any money)

second, I am not exaggerating they were complete idiots, there were times I had to try to quess how they screwed up so I could answer what they would deem to be correct even though it was very wrong.

I am not trying to imply that I am being denied anything right now, but when people say " the fundies are trying to take over the nation through homeschooling, we have to shut it down and stop them" I think I have the right to ask why they want to trample all over my rights just because they don't agree.
btw why do you assume that I don't think that moderate protestants Orthodox and Catholics are Christians? I don't believe I said anything that would lead to that conclusion.
I am not, and wouldn't try to force my belief system on anyone, not even my kids. Why do so many people get so upset with a Christian in politics and I am not allowed to get upset when an athiest teacher tries to use thier classroom as a pulpit to preach the evils of Christianity? Aren't we all in the same boat anyway? I don't want secular views forced on my kids, I don't think Christianity should taught in public schools so I am homeschooling my kids. What is the big problem with that? It's not like I am marching on Capitol Hill demanding bible study and prayer in the public schools, so how am I forcing my beliefs on you? explain please.

It's your kind of thinking that allows the states to be a bastillion of ignorance regarding science. 1 in 5 americans believe the sun orbits the earth, and it's stupid crap like this that doesn't help.
let them think that... and it might well do.

Whats your problem, I agree with these people. They make sense, we need to get rid of abortion, we need to make every country more conservative, and we can only do that through education and proving how wrong some ideologies are.

EDIT: Oh and by the way i am a Christian and I wish I had had an eductaion like thid, instead I ended up in an anti-Bush liberal place...

The problem is you might be a Christian and happy to live in a Christian country, run by Christians, but there are a LOT of non-Christians in your fellow states- they should not be forced to live in the same country, run by people influenced by a religion they do not agree with.

This is out of line.

Edit: we seem to be experiencing NS timeslip again. :(

I thought you were retiring from NS anyway? What happened?

Question is how. I oppose Nazism and that being taught to children by their parents, but certain parts of it, like women being demoted to birth-machines, harsh immigration and citizenship laws, and a stop of abortion aren't illegal opinions. Stuff like that needs to be stopped by public action and not by making it illegal...

I was homeschooled from 5th grade up until I graduated out of high school. Very thankful for it. My parents pulled me out after I was asked by my teacher if my parents owned guns or if they argued a lot. Sorry, that's not your job. This was over 8 years ago.....

And now I'm in college :D .

Although when I do have my own kids, It's either going to be homeschooling or a strict private school that matches my beleifs.

The problem is you might be a Christian and happy to live in a Christian country, run by Christians, but there are a LOT of non-Christians in your fellow states- they should not be forced to live in the same country, run by people influenced by a religion they do not agree with.
its for the best, they'll go to hell if they don't follow God.

First, no school would have taught you that. I don't know (or care) when and where you went to school, But when I was in high school (Texas, in the 1980s) any teacher that strayed that far from the cirriculum would have found themselves in danger of losing their job.
The things she brought up, that you are referring to here, are not 'straying' from the curriculum. Curriculum does not state one way or another is a fetus is a baby, if Christians are idiots or not, or whether making money is good, or bad. That is NOT addressed in currculum, not in the US, not in Canada. Those are opinions, expressed by individual teachers, that do not meld with the particular views of others. If those opinions are taught as FACTS instead of opinions, there is a problem. As a teacher, I think opinions are damn important, but I also recognise that voicing my opinions without making it VERY clear they are MY OPINIONS and NOT fact can mean that student take them as being presented as fact.



If you're not exaggerating, then your teachers were complete idiots. Or perhaps undertrained in the particular field they were teaching. It may shock you to know that teachers are not experts in everything..and sometimes gym teachers are asked to teach physics, and math teachers are asked to teach art. We may not like it, but we don't have much choice. And sometimes that means you don't really know your subject well, and stupid shit gets taught to kids.



You're not being denied anything because you're a fundamentalist. Quit the "we're being oppressed" act. The school system in this country sucks, no matter what your religion. You want to teach your kids at home? Go right ahead, no one's stopping you. All the rest of us want is for you to stop trying to force your belief system on us. I don't dare what you believe, but don't expect me to have to believe it, too. BTW, I really resent you evangelicals and your arrogant insistance on calling yourselves simply christian,
I'm going to stop you there. Why are you calling this woman an evangelist? Whare are you saying she is trying to force her beliefs on you? Or are you speaking in the more general 'you', and not in fact directing this at her? Is it really necessary to attack someone who admits to being religious, and homeschooling their kids as having some sort of political agenda to take over the world? I've seen Smunkeeville's posts a lot lately, and I don't see her cramming her beliefs down other's throats, but in thread after thread she is accused of doing just that, of being arrogant, of being a fundamentalist, of blah blah blah blah blah. Focus your anger on people who are actually guilty of what you are accusing her of. She is NOT guilty by 'association'. [/rant]

let them think that... and it might well do.

Who do you think knows best? Every single person ever educated fully in physics and astronomy or some uneducated fundamentalists who believe in some magic wizard who casts spells to control the world, and tortures people gleefully who don't believe in him?

its for the best, they'll go to hell if they don't follow God.
Ah, but if you don't believe in God and you don't believe in Hell, then there's no threat...

I might as well say- "You will rot in the dungeons of Traxal 7 when the Space Worm comes for your soul!"... for all the fear it inspires :rolleyes:

I'm going to stop you there. Why are you calling this woman an evangelist? Whare are you saying she is trying to force her beliefs on you? Or are you speaking in the more general 'you', and not in fact directing this at her? Is it really necessary to attack someone who admits to being religious, and homeschooling their kids as having some sort of political agenda to take over the world? I've seen Smunkeeville's posts a lot lately, and I don't see her cramming her beliefs down other's throats, but in thread after thread she is accused of doing just that, of being arrogant, of being a fundamentalist, of blah blah blah blah blah. Focus your anger on people who are actually guilty of what you are accusing her of. She is NOT guilty by 'association'. [/rant]
thank you ;) I thought maybe I had PMS or something I have felt very attacked lately and couldn't figure out why. I thought I was doing okay, not being mean. Anyway if someone else sees it too maybe I am not imagining it. :D

sorry to get off topic. just had to say thanks....

Last night I was watching Newsnight on BBC2, as I usually do on a night. They were doing a piece on Christian home schooling and the intent behind such. To be honest I was dumbfounded.

This is an Article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/4311709.stm) from BBC news written in March that touches upon similar issues but isn't quite as graphic about what the actual beliefs are of these people as the report I saw. However I'm struggling to find any articles specifically from the report I saw lastnight where the people interviewed were very forthright.

Here are some extracts from the news article.

"Mr Farris, a constitutional lawyer and political activist, established the college with a very clear aim: "To prepare Christian men and women who will lead our nation and shape our culture with timeless Biblical values and fidelity to the spirit of the American founding."

"If we are going to have our values reflected in our culture, we've got to train our kids in those values and train them for leadership," Mr Farris said. "And so this is a very concerted effort to train top leaders.""

I'm scared.
This issue was addressed lastnight only it was put forth in a very different manner. This issue was brought up when in a discussion with a man and his wife, and according to them it isn't quite as equal as "To prepare Christian men and women who will lead our nation......", they simply stipulated that they are raising men to lead and women to support these men in achieving their goals of leadership. But should either way be the case this is jingoism to the extreme as it doesn't even get past state boarders before it foriegn policies get far too belligerent.

"Christians do have something to say in politics," said Mr Farris. "We have as much right as anybody else to speak our mind and assert our values."

I agree, you have a right to assert your values to your own life.

"If we are going to have our values reflected in our culture, we've got to train our kids in those values and train them for leadership," Mr Farris said. "And so this is a very concerted effort to train top leaders."

Leadership of whom? Why does the installation of your own values into your own culture necessitate leadership over all people?

"If other people feel threatened by it, they've got to get out there and mobilise their folks to be well-trained, serving internships, getting to Washington and so forth."

That isn't exactly a mutual "peace loving" attitude I detect here. Just a little provocative if you ask me.
Won't they reprsent all members of their country should they be elected?

Is it just me or do these people need putting into their place, which they're entitled to. They just aren't entitled to decide where everyone else's place is.
Anyone else worried? I know I am and I don't even live in the U.S., I just see how it would effect me and so many other nations if the religious right gets any greater stronghold in politics above what it already has.

I'd particularly like to hear the opinions of those in the U.S. about this because I know there are well rounded individuals that live there and it would probably make me a bit less worried about the possible directions that the U.S. could take in the near and distant future. As this really does seem like a distinct possibility and just as greater threat to true freedom and civil liberty as any other threat there is at the moment, even if not being as violent.

...as opposed to non-Christians telling Christians what they can do/believe?

is it only acceptable to advance morals when they're your morals being advanced?

EG, would you rather see the ACLU's influence in American governing?

I don't want secular views forced on my kids, I don't think Christianity should taught in public schools so I am homeschooling my kids. What is the big problem with that? It's not like I am marching on Capitol Hill demanding bible study and prayer in the public schools, so how am I forcing my beliefs on you? explain please.
Quoted again...just in case someone missed it.

I thought you were retiring from NS anyway? What happened?
I'm on vacation. (and I'm spending it here? WT... :confused: )

Who do you think knows best? Every single person ever educated fully in physics and astronomy or some uneducated fundamentalists who believe in some magic wizard who casts spells to control the world, and tortures people gleefully who don't believe in him?
educated fundamentalists, like me. I wasn't brought up a christian, I chose to become one. my single mother isn't religious, she's not a republican, I've chosen my way, and I know what I'm doing, I'm not doing it becuase mummy told me to.

I was homeschooled from 5th grade up until I graduated out of high school. Very thankful for it. My parents pulled me out after I was asked by my teacher if my parents owned guns or if they argued a lot. Sorry, that's not your job. This was over 8 years ago.....

And now I'm in college :D .

Although when I do have my own kids, It's either going to be homeschooling or a strict private school that matches my beleifs.
My favourite was the D.A.R.E program, which teaches kids about the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, but also teaches you about how the police are your friends, and that you should report your parents if they smoke marijuana....

...in many ways it's a good program that simply oversteps its bounds. My parents were terrified for a few years that we would get mad at them and report them for reefer smoking. One of my friends did just that to her dad.

My favourite was the D.A.R.E program, which teaches kids about the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, but also teaches you about how the police are your friends, and that you should report your parents if they smoke marijuana....

...in many ways it's a good program that simply oversteps its bounds. My parents were terrified for a few years that we would get mad at them and report them for reefer smoking. One of my friends did just that to her dad. Didn't Stalin encourage kids informing on their parents as well?

CUlture and religion dont always fit in with natural human behavior, and if it doesnt then i dont trust it

I was homeschooled from 5th grade up until I graduated out of high school. Very thankful for it. My parents pulled me out after I was asked by my teacher if my parents owned guns or if they argued a lot. Sorry, that's not your job. This was over 8 years ago.....

And now I'm in college :D .

Although when I do have my own kids, It's either going to be homeschooling or a strict private school that matches my beleifs.And what does this have to do with what I said?

Didn't Stalin encourage kids informing on their parents as well?Standard Nazi procedure, only it was the Hitler Youth that asked for denounciation of parents (and membership was mandatory).

My favourite was the D.A.R.E program, which teaches kids about the effects of drug and alcohol abuse, but also teaches you about how the police are your friends, and that you should report your parents if they smoke marijuana....

...in many ways it's a good program that simply oversteps its bounds. My parents were terrified for a few years that we would get mad at them and report them for reefer smoking. One of my friends did just that to her dad.

The police aren't your friends. They can help you, be nice, but I don't really doubt that many of them would not care if the BOR were done away with. (NO)

Didn't Stalin encourage kids informing on their parents as well?
Funny...that's just what my dad used to mutter... :eek:

And what does this have to do with what I said?


Going to say that just because someone homeschools their kids, doesn't mean it's evil and turns out evil minority-hating bigots. Myself as an example.

Going to say that just because someone homeschools their kids, doesn't mean it's evil and turns out evil minority-hating bigots. Myself as an example.And where did I say that homeschooling was evil? My point was that homeschooling is technically a different form of raising a child and it's not our business to interfere with that directly (unless there's a form of abuse).
If what you read is all you can read out of my post, then I call into question whether you are such a good example, since you might not be as openminded as you think.

Those of us on the East Coast are worried as well, considering every once in a while some religious figure from the south would get up on his pulpit and talk about how evil and immoral New York is. And this was BEFORE 9/11.

I never understood that.
Has New York become less moral since 9/11?

Or they are going to experience a severe backlash in which religion will be banned from government altogehter.
Just like in 1776!

I don't think that anything significant will happen due to the Religious Right-Wing Minority. They don't really have any policies to turn the US into a third world country, nor are they sufficiently radical to provoke an extreme backlash. I think they will return to obscurity soon enough.

But I also get the feeling that their fucking up is going to include more wars along the way.
I don't know about that. Last time the Christian Right held significant sway in US politics (the 1920s), the US was isolationist.

And where did I say that homeschooling was evil? My point was that homeschooling is technically a different form of raising a child and it's not our business to interfere with that directly (unless there's a form of abuse).
If what you read is all you can read out of my post, then I call into question whether you are such a good example, since you might not be as openminded as you think.


Not to you specifically, it's to the ones who want to ban homeschooling so they can ban certain teachings they don't find "appropriate".

Not to you specifically, it's to the ones who want to ban homeschooling so they can ban certain teachings they don't find "appropriate".
Then why don't you quote those instead of me?

EDIT: Oh and by the way i am a Christian and I wish I had had an eductaion like thid, instead I ended up in an anti-Bush liberal place...
I've been away for a week, but I remember you previously proclaiming yourself to be an "atheist conservative". Did you convert?

let them think that... and it might well do.
No, it doesn't. Even the Catholic Church admits that Copernicus was right on that one.

EG, would you rather see the ACLU's influence in American governing?
I'm sure that most Americans would like to see the Constitution play a significant role in their government.

educated fundamentalists, like me. I wasn't brought up a christian, I chose to become one. my single mother isn't religious, she's not a republican, I've chosen my way, and I know what I'm doing, I'm not doing it becuase mummy told me to.
You're not a Republican either, for you are not American. It appears that you only became a Christian to fulfil your "conservative" self-image. Which is utterly the worst reason to convert, anyone will tell you that.

I've been away for a week, but I remember you previously proclaiming yourself to be an "atheist conservative". Did you convert?


I suspect that Blu-tac is an alias based on most of the stuff he posts - so wouldn't need much coherance.

OK i don't approve of laws that are specific to ONE religion being impressed over others( eg stuff like banning gay marriage) but Christians do have a right to be in politics and attempt to make the world a better place.

Okay first, I know what happened and since you weren't there, you don't. Nobody listens when a student complains here about teachers straying from curriculum a parent has to complain and it had better be a parent with money (my parent didn't care, and even if she would have we didn't have any money)

second, I am not exaggerating they were complete idiots, there were times I had to try to quess how they screwed up so I could answer what they would deem to be correct even though it was very wrong.

I am not trying to imply that I am being denied anything right now, but when people say " the fundies are trying to take over the nation through homeschooling, we have to shut it down and stop them" I think I have the right to ask why they want to trample all over my rights just because they don't agree.
btw why do you assume that I don't think that moderate protestants Orthodox and Catholics are Christians? I don't believe I said anything that would lead to that conclusion.
I am not, and wouldn't try to force my belief system on anyone, not even my kids. Why do so many people get so upset with a Christian in politics and I am not allowed to get upset when an athiest teacher tries to use thier classroom as a pulpit to preach the evils of Christianity? Aren't we all in the same boat anyway? I don't want secular views forced on my kids, I don't think Christianity should taught in public schools so I am homeschooling my kids. What is the big problem with that? It's not like I am marching on Capitol Hill demanding bible study and prayer in the public schools, so how am I forcing my beliefs on you? explain please.


I didn't mean you specifically. I meant fundamentalist christians. And as I believe I stated, I have no problem, indeed no interest, in whether you home school your children.

The things she brought up, that you are referring to here, are not 'straying' from the curriculum. Curriculum does not state one way or another is a fetus is a baby, if Christians are idiots or not, or whether making money is good, or bad. That is NOT addressed in currculum, not in the US, not in Canada. Those are opinions, expressed by individual teachers, that do not meld with the particular views of others. If those opinions are taught as FACTS instead of opinions, there is a problem. As a teacher, I think opinions are damn important, but I also recognise that voicing my opinions without making it VERY clear they are MY OPINIONS and NOT fact can mean that student take them as being presented as fact.


Poor choice of words. and actually, I agree that presnting opinion as fact is wrong. And if she really did encounter this, I feel bad for her. Crappy as my high school was, I never had to deal with that.

Or perhaps undertrained in the particular field they were teaching. It may shock you to know that teachers are not experts in everything..and sometimes gym teachers are asked to teach physics, and math teachers are asked to teach art. We may not like it, but we don't have much choice. And sometimes that means you don't really know your subject well, and stupid shit gets taught to kids.

OK, good point.

I'm going to stop you there. Why are you calling this woman an evangelist? Whare are you saying she is trying to force her beliefs on you? Or are you speaking in the more general 'you', and not in fact directing this at her? Is it really necessary to attack someone who admits to being religious, and homeschooling their kids as having some sort of political agenda to take over the world? I've seen Smunkeeville's posts a lot lately, and I don't see her cramming her beliefs down other's throats, but in thread after thread she is accused of doing just that, of being arrogant, of being a fundamentalist, of blah blah blah blah blah. Focus your anger on people who are actually guilty of what you are accusing her of. She is NOT guilty by 'association'. [/rant]

I've already addressed this. I get tired of hearing about "godless liberals" and how we're all communitsts and devil-worshippers, and I get tired of their revisionist history, so I went off. However, I went off on the wrong person. I do apologize, ladies.

This is a somewhat disturbing idea, that people are "training" their children, in essence. It shows me that these types of people are quite worried about the future of our nation, implying that they believe that there are more and more people with views that conflict with theirs abound in the law-making process and in the voting public. It's almost as if they're resorting to combat in a political sense. Sounds to me like they're just plain scared...

I've already addressed this. I get tired of hearing about "godless liberals" and how we're all communitsts and devil-worshippers, and I get tired of their revisionist history, so I went off. However, I went off on the wrong person. I do apologize, ladies.
Thank you. It's a limitation of the English language that the singular and plural second person is the same word, 'you'...and that sometimes it's hard to tell whether you are being addressed directly or not. Anyway...most people wouldn't bother apologising, so yay for you! *does a happy dance*

Great thread mate. Personally I think this sort of thing should be stopped, it's pritty much brainwashing to eb honest.

And liberals aren't just as guilty or worse for your alleged "brainwashing" practices, generally having a much stronger voice at most institutions than conservatives?

Anyways, I go to a religiously-based university that is ranked 71st among all American universities and rising quickly. It was virtually unknown twenty years ago for academics. Here, you will not find a spot of alcohol, illegal drugs, or a smoker, or hear any word worse than "crap". My American Heritage course begins with a prayer, and graduation requirements include four semesters of religion. Its easily one has one of the largest enrollments in the nation. Oh, and on Sunday the campus shuts down as all buildings are used as church meeting-places, and also at 11:00 on Tuesdays for a religious speaker or author. The internet gets really nice DL speed and ping (good for my BF1942 :) , but I don't even wanna know what would happen if you tried to access a porn site). And the dress code here is fairly conservative, especially for women (I can still get away with my traditional shorts and sandals). Its a fairly high-tech campus, and we get the modern buildings and eating places just like the others. The foriegn language programs here are absolutely huge, as are the foriegn student programs. And best of all, Chinese food on my student card is just one minute away on foot :) .

So needless to say, religiously-based colleges really aren't as bad as you'd think. I get all that I would expect from a high-level college, but socially I much prefer the environment here. You still get to have alot of fun with all the sports places, arcades, and theaters (no "R" movies though ;) ) on-campus here. Just not with beer or drugs, which is fine by me.

Christian education is not bad at all. So long as you go about it properly (as some homeschoolers often times do not)

Or perhaps undertrained in the particular field they were teaching. It may shock you to know that teachers are not experts in everything..and sometimes gym teachers are asked to teach physics, and math teachers are asked to teach art. We may not like it, but we don't have much choice. And sometimes that means you don't really know your subject well, and stupid shit gets taught to kids.

Back in Alpharetta, Georgia my school's assistant basketball coach was my calculus teacher. And he was REALLY good at teaching it. Basically, we have 25 minutes of lecture (we never even used the text), then 25 minutes to play Chinese Poker while he goes sports websites. And every single one of his seventy or so BC students passed that AP exam. 100% pass rates are almost unheard of.

I was homeschooled for most of my life (other than 2 years in grade school and 2 in highschool) In college I was educated in one of these little religious schools designed to create leaders. It wasnt located in the states, but in Australia. Did you know that every country and practically every religion creates its own training schools in order to educate and prepare the next generation? Did you realise that all different schools of thought desire power and leadership to help shape the country into what they believe will be a better place?

I think its not something to fear or to discourage. Its what makes countries like America good; a freedom to learn what you want and to express your beliefs. Its what makes a democracy. The only way these future leaders can shape the country and world is if a majority of the country votes them into power. They have no power without the majority. So if you all are so determined that Christians (although I really think in the context of this thread it would be better to say "religious") are so much a minority, then dont stress about us!

I wasnt brainwashed. I am always challenging and re-challenging my beliefs to sharpen and grow my understanding. I am widely read and have a grasp on world politics and issues and have no trouble blending with un-religious society.

I think its sad that so many believers waste their time trying to reform a government and country when their focus should be elsewhere, but I also think its sad that so many leftists want to shut down religious schools with one breath, when the next one is screaming at Christians for tolerance and acceptance. Religion doesnt belong in public school, although neither does athiesm, it all belongs in private institutes. You should be applauding Christians who send their kids to private schools instead of trying to force their beliefs on other people. Arent they just doing what you want them to?

Or do you really just want them to be shut up altogether?

I dont know if anyone is still on this thread, but another thought came to mind....

I think we should be more concerned about backwoods religious folks who cant read well enough to see God is love and various other important Biblical principles that guide how we are to behave in the secular world. The students attending colleges like the one mentioned in the article are obviously intelligent human beings who have something to add to society...not ones who are going to scream "God hates fags" or are apt to carry baby coffins around in anti-abortion rallies.

its for the best, they'll go to hell if they don't follow God.

Good point. If you're right.

And, history suggests that you are.... not.

...as opposed to non-Christians telling Christians what they can do/believe?

is it only acceptable to advance morals when they're your morals being advanced?

EG, would you rather see the ACLU's influence in American governing?

Erm.... a group that advocates greater civil liberty, rather than a platform of condemnation and control...

Let me think...

...Here, you will not find a spot of alcohol, illegal drugs, or a smoker, or hear any word worse than "crap"...

I think you might want to look up the word 'Naïve '....

I don't actually see the problem. Yes I homeschool my kids, and yes I am raising them in a "Christian home".
I went to public school, where I was told that Christians are idiots, and that fetuses aren't babies, and that we should all just vote for Ralph Nader because making money is wrong.

Yeah right. I live in a free country, I should be able to educate my children the way I see fit. Christains aren't really going to be able to "take over the nation" there are too many non-christians who vote. Besides most of my teachers didn't do what I would consider even a basic job of teaching anyway. I had a US History teacher that thought that Betty Crocker made the first American flag, that there were 52 states and that Alaska belonged to Canada. I also had a geometry teacher that thought that theorems were just suggestions and weren't always true, and didn't understand why 2 points are always colinear even if the picture didn't show a line.
I had an english teacher who thought that your and you're were the same thing and that synonym meant that it rhymed
I don't want my kids to have to go to school all week and then be stuck studying nights and weekends just to get the barest of an education.
I have the money and the time to spend making sure they get a good education so why should I be denied the privilage just because I am a Christian?


You certainly shouldn't be denied that right for that reason, and from reading your other posts you shouldn't be denied for any other reason either. Simply that the people involved within this report and any other people like them shouldn't even be involed in their childs upbringing from the sounds of their intentions, in my opinion.
I was always brought up with the intent that I would one day be of the right mind to decide things for myself, not to be told what is and is not, and not to be told what to do with my life in general. That seems to be your intent aswell so this thread was not aimed at you personally.


Are you an anarchist? Because the assertion of one's values over the people and the leadership over all people by following one's values are concepts held dear by pretty much every politician, and are kind of at the foundation of democracy - or government, period, for that matter. It's not a Bible thumper thing like you make it out to be. They just seem to be being honest about it.

Once again, I can't stand religion having a role in politics, I just wanted to question the odd way you responded in those two quotes.

That's a big question. Well for me it is.
You see, 'Anarchism' has been twisted and bent so much it doesn't necessarily mean anything anymore. Especially in the U.S. from reading other posts on this site.

I believe in this as my definition to 'Anarchism': the name given to a principle of theory of life and conduct under which society is conceived without government - harmony in such a society being obtained, not by submission to law, or by obedience to any authority, but by free agreements concluded between various individuals and groups of individuals, territorial and professional, freely constituted for the sake of production and consumption. As also for the satisfaction of the infinite variety of the needs and aspirations of a civilized being. In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state of its functions.

If there is a level of assertion from one group without previous agreeance from another group then that group can not expect agreeance at any point.
What these people suggest is a restriction of people's freedoms while they assert their own beliefs onto another........ most of all their own children.

It's not a Bible thumper thing like you make it out to be.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to make it out to be anything, certainly not "Bible thumping". It simply takes the context of 'fascism' for me. But your right, most governments have fascist ideology without really admitting it.

Whats your problem, I agree with these people. They make sense, we need to get rid of abortion, we need to make every country more conservative, and we can only do that through education and proving how wrong some ideologies are.

EDIT: Oh and by the way i am a Christian and I wish I had had an eductaion like thid, instead I ended up in an anti-Bush liberal place...

You're entitled to your opinion (which from some other posts made; doesn't count for much). Please allow me to hold my own.

...as opposed to non-Christians telling Christians what they can do/believe?

is it only acceptable to advance morals when they're your morals being advanced?

EG, would you rather see the ACLU's influence in American governing?

This is a problem. Look at the questions you aim at me.

It's quite obvious from these questions you do share some ideals with these people featured within the article. What's also obvious is that because these people (that you share certain sentiments with) have asserted their intent in a certain way, that you instaneously interpret any objection to that opression to be inclined to be opressing you in the same way.

That's the result of seeing the world in 'black and white'. It's not always true, and sometimes if the 'black' and the 'white' would let the 'grey' take-over from time to time; then things would be a lot better off I presume.

We're not all out to get you. live your life and allow me to do the same.



Just to comment on the thread in general in regards to the replies people have given.

I didn't think I would get so much response and reading people's responses has been interesting. I suspect that one reason why there has been a response like this is because it effects children.
Each person deserves a fresh start, doesn't matter at what point in their life they get it. But to be deprived of that chance from the 'get go' makes me sad. It doesn't matter if it's happening half way around the world - it just pisses me off.

Coercion and manipulation, in my opinion, shouldn't be used within any value system that claims to be for good of everyone. It should not be used in any political ideology and be expected to maintain a society. To coerce and manipulate one's own children means you're scum.

All children deserve to be nurtured until they are ready to choose for themselves where their lives may end up.

I didn't think I would get so much response and reading people's responses has been interesting. I suspect that one reason why there has been a response like this is because it effects children.
Each person deserves a fresh start, doesn't matter at what point in their life they get it. But to be deprived of that chance from the 'get go' makes me sad. It doesn't matter if it's happening half way around the world - it just pisses me off.

Coercion and manipulation, in my opinion, shouldn't be used within any value system that claims to be for good of everyone. It should not be used in any political ideology and be expected to maintain a society. To coerce and manipulate one's own children means you're scum.

All children deserve to be nurtured until they are ready to choose for themselves where their lives may end up.
Well said!

I've been away for a week, but I remember you previously proclaiming yourself to be an "atheist conservative". Did you convert?


yes, about a month ago. and I've never turned back.

It appears that you only became a Christian to fulfil your "conservative" self-image. Which is utterly the worst reason to convert, anyone will tell you that.

It "appears" do you know the true reason? No, only I do.

It "appears" do you know the true reason? No, only I do.
Okay then, tell us what that reason is?

Okay then, tell us what that reason is?
why? what do you have to earn from it. But if you must know I heard speech by a minister and realised that Christianity was the right path, plus it makes sense, cus if God doesn't exist and you don't believe in him you go to hell, but if he does exist and you believe in him and follow his rules, you go to heavan, and if he doesn't exist then so be it....

why? what do you have to earn from it. But if you must know I heard speech by a minister and realised that Christianity was the right path, plus it makes sense, cus if God doesn't exist and you don't believe in him you go to hell, but if he does exist and you believe in him and follow his rules, you go to heavan, and if he doesn't exist then so be it.... What you seem to be trying to say is that you don't fully understand, and you can't quite remember what exactly went on inside your soul - just that something made you which you never thought could before. Am I right?

Now where were we… oh yes. How about we don't accuse the otherside of "brainwashing" and just ban all forms of biased education?

What you seem to be trying to say is that you don't fully understand, and you can't quite remember what exactly went on inside your soul - just that something made you which you never thought could before. Am I right?

Now where were we… oh yes. How about we don't accuse the otherside of "brainwashing" and just ban all forms of biased education?

Erm... no, not really. The way I read hs post, he's simply trying to buy into Christianity to keep out of hell, in case it exists.
Stupid reason, reallly, but if it works for him, fine.

Erm... no, not really. The way I read hs post, he's simply trying to buy into Christianity to keep out of hell, in case it exists.
Stupid reason, reallly, but if it works for him, fine. If that's the case, why Christianity first?

If that's the case, why Christianity first?

How do you mean, first?

Are you an anarchist? Because the assertion of one's values over the people and the leadership over all people by following one's values are concepts held dear by pretty much every politician, and are kind of at the foundation of democracy - or government, period, for that matter. It's not a Bible thumper thing like you make it out to be. They just seem to be being honest about it.
there's a subtle difference - the important part is the difference in values that 'normal' politicians try to enforce on the general populace, and these uber christian values.
as already noted, the latter will see 'sinners' as immoral or evil, alternative points of view as wrong (not the word of god or whatever) and will actively seek to enforce these views on others - which is bad in that religion is, and should remain, a personal choice. even worse when you consider the political and policy implications that follow from pursuing this ideal. when the state starts outlawing certain ways of thinking, then its time to get scared.
"normal" politicians, apart from generally being assholes, tend to follow a much more liberal adgenda - even conseratives...

having these fundamentalist christians in charge could quite easily end up akin to nazism imo... which really scares the shit out of me



Then you went to a bad school, mopst school arn't and should not be like that, certainly mine arn't.

Again you are assuming that all teachers are fools, now maybe they are/qhere in the US however long ago you went to school, but they ain't like that in britian. There is a reason that kids should go to a state school you know, it keeps everything equal and fair. And it means that they get an assured minimum (good) level of education. Schools shouold be compeletly secular, not favoring any religion at all but not attacking any religion eather.

A) Thats so they egt a good education, homework teachers you a lot of things you know. And I doubt they get the barest of an education.

B) I'm not debating your right, I'm just saying that people who set up there own PRivate shcool, lets point that out again, this is a Private school (Not home education) that is based on, to be honest, complete crap. I don't know about the US but over here you can't just set up a school and start teaching.
nobody seemed to comment on your post, so i thought i'd just give you some claps for writing a good 'un :)

*claps*

(tho i did edit in bold :P )



i dont really see the problem here. if people want to be hardcore christian and reaise their kids hardcore christian, isnt that their business? and dont they have as much a right to share their point of view as we have to ignore it? its not like theyre going to take over the world, theyre a fairly small minority in the states,who just happen to get a lot of press, and i think a lot of people fail to realize that. so, theres no need to spazz out over some people with whom we dont agree. theyre no threat. at all.
no not a problem if they were just trying to teach their kids to be "nice, christian people" but the fact that they are actively training them to become leaders is the scary part
they may be within their rights to do so, but that doesn't mean its a good thing to happen. i'm just glad that the democratic system will put up a strong barrier against them

why? what do you have to earn from it. But if you must know I heard speech by a minister and realised that Christianity was the right path, plus it makes sense, cus if God doesn't exist and you don't believe in him you go to hell, but if he does exist and you believe in him and follow his rules, you go to heavan, and if he doesn't exist then so be it....

By my reckoning, that means you are still not a Christian... although you may pay lip-service to that name.

A 'true' Christian is a Christian because they are 'inspired' to be so... not because it seems 'most profitable', or 'safest', or 'makes sense'.

"Generation Joshua" indeed. "We don't want our children exposed to unsuitable influences such as homosexuality!". Would I happen to be the only person present who is both revulsed and concerned by such sentiments? Secular law is evidently and irrefutably the most efficient and acceptably method of legislation, since it neither discriminates nor alienates any one facet of society, whilst furthermore the indoctrination, for that is what it constitutes, of such infants ought to be considered an offence in the eyes of all law. Such indoctrination only serves to progress the policy of introspection, ignorance and intolerance that permeates the risable adherents to "american" christianity, who moreover propose that their children, once utterly indoctrinated into a regressed parody of christianity, assume the tenure of political leaders. That it is either feasible or acceptable that such individuals are considired for government is implicit of quite the regressed, introspective nature of American politics, since such individuals, once in office, would enact a series of legislation that would regress Amerixcan society into the intolerant, sectarian society riven by ethnic fractitiousness that was so prevailant prior to the illuminated premiership of John.F Kennedy.

It "appears" do you know the true reason? No, only I do.
Apologies, I kow that I jumped to a conclusion, but it was based on information derived from your posts. It appeared to me that you were trying to use Christianity to justify the introduction of über-conservative laws.

So what kind of Christian are you now? Catholic, Anglican...?

why? what do you have to earn from it. But if you must know I heard speech by a minister and realised that Christianity was the right path, plus it makes sense, cus if God doesn't exist and you don't believe in him you go to hell, but if he does exist and you believe in him and follow his rules, you go to heavan, and if he doesn't exist then so be it....
So why is it the government's job to ensure that everyone is a Christian and follows (a particular interpretation of) God's way?

having these fundamentalist christians in charge could quite easily end up akin to nazism imo... which really scares the shit out of me
I think that's going a bit far. Civil liberties would go down the toilet, but I don't think that Christians are going to kill people in death camps.

This is exactly the reason why there should be a full separation of Church and State - there is no place for religion in education. Schools should teach fact, not politics or belief.

Training people to vote US Constitution Party and become Christian Fundementalists (whom I hold the same regard as Islamic Fundementalists) at school goes completely against democracy - the democratic right to choose who you vote for - let alone which God you do or do not believe in, and not have it drilled inside your head at school. School is for fact, not belief.

Religion-free education works in France. Sure, their laws are tough, but everyone is undiscriminated and equal at school, regardless of religion. And as far as I know, there's no indoctrination to be seen.

I think that's going a bit far. Civil liberties would go down the toilet, but I don't think that Christians are going to kill people in death camps.Depends on the what parts. The death camps wouldn't happen, but a lot of social values are quite similar if not the same.

To add in the original topic of this post, I go to a private Christian university and I couldn't be happier. All who live on campus are required to sign a "contract" saying what they, as Christians in a Christian university, will uphold while living on these grounds. This includes no drinking of alcohol, no smoking, and no gambling (all of these on and off campus), as well as no online piracy. I think it's a good thing, IMHO, as I'm sure there will be some who'd jump the gun if given the chance to.

I don't see any problem with having Christian-based schooling. Neither do I see a problem with Christian-based politics classes either. If those who want to defend their beliefs within their own realms of living, why not step into politics to defend them? The majority--especially here--is not advocating the infringement of the beliefs of others and their right to practice them, instead we want to fight the more extreme of the secular groups in politics (a mirror to the kind you're arguing against, yet you say nothing about these) who wish to intrude upon our own practices.

This is exactly the reason why there should be a full separation of Church and State - there is no place for religion in education. Schools should teach fact, not politics or belief.

Training people to vote US Constitution Party and become Christian Fundementalists (whom I hold the same regard as Islamic Fundementalists) at school goes completely against democracy - the democratic right to choose who you vote for - let alone which God you do or do not believe in, and not have it drilled inside your head at school. School is for fact, not belief.

Religion-free education works in France. Sure, their laws are tough, but everyone is undiscriminated and equal at school, regardless of religion. And as far as I know, there's no indoctrination to be seen.

There is no place for religion in public education for sure, but don't start trying to stop private schooling and what they wish to teach. If that's what you were advocating anyway.

To add in the original topic of this post, I go to a private Christian university and I couldn't be happier. All who live on campus are required to sign a "contract" saying what they, as Christians in a Christian university, will uphold while living on these grounds. This includes no drinking of alcohol, no smoking, and no gambling (all of these on and off campus), as well as no online piracy. I think it's a good thing, IMHO, as I'm sure there will be some who'd jump the gun if given the chance to.

I don't see any problem with having Christian-based schooling. Neither do I see a problem with Christian-based politics classes either. If those who want to defend their beliefs within their own realms of living, why not step into politics to defend them? The majority--especially here--is not advocating the infringement of the beliefs of others and their right to practice them, instead we want to fight the more extreme of the secular groups in politics (a mirror to the kind you're arguing against, yet you say nothing about these) who wish to intrude upon our own practices.

Incidentally, as an American citizen how on earth did you observe the broadcast in question? Furthermore, I can envisage life at a Christian only, essentially monastic university being tediously, immensely, painfully chaste and boring, since you lack the social experiance and capacity to interact that attending a "blasphemous, satanic university" would proffer one.

There is no place for religion in public education for sure, but don't start trying to stop private schooling and what they wish to teach. If that's what you were advocating anyway.

I implore you to mature, experiance the world and then return and discuss matters with the "big boys" when you are informed to the extent that you are qualified to do so.

Depends on the what parts. The death camps wouldn't happen, but a lot of social values are quite similar if not the same.
I agree, many values are similar, but if there would be no death camps I think you can pretty much throw away the Nazi comparisons.

there's a subtle difference - the important part is the difference in values that 'normal' politicians try to enforce on the general populace, and these uber christian values.
as already noted, the latter will see 'sinners' as immoral or evil, alternative points of view as wrong (not the word of god or whatever) and will actively seek to enforce these views on others - which is bad in that religion is, and should remain, a personal choice. even worse when you consider the political and policy implications that follow from pursuing this ideal. when the state starts outlawing certain ways of thinking, then its time to get scared.
"normal" politicians, apart from generally being assholes, tend to follow a much more liberal adgenda - even conseratives...

having these fundamentalist christians in charge could quite easily end up akin to nazism imo... which really scares the shit out of me


Hmm, like President Bush? Hardly. We had Mel Martinez come and speak at our college my first semester, and I must say he appears to be a very competent leader. If I was a constituent of his I'd vote for him. I was able to meet him and shake his hand, although I didn't get to ask him about whether or not he supported the Gun ban or not...


nobody seemed to comment on your post, so i thought i'd just give you some claps for writing a good 'un :)

*claps*

(tho i did edit in bold :P )




no not a problem if they were just trying to teach their kids to be "nice, christian people" but the fact that they are actively training them to become leaders is the scary part

What is the problem with that? Do you want your children to be followers all their lives or become great leaders? You never hear the words "Wow, he's a great follower". Democracy at work. It put a decent (Not the greatest) President in Office, hopefully next time we can put a better one in the WO.

they may be within their rights to do so, but that doesn't mean its a good thing to happen. i'm just glad that the democratic system will put up a strong barrier against them

These are the people that elected (Myself included) President Bush. Don't think that we can't put some real men and women who have morals into offices.

These are the people that elected (Myself included) President Bush. Don't think that we can't put some real men and women who have morals into offices.

May I enquire as to why yuo felt any compulsion to support Bush?

Question is how. I oppose Nazism and that being taught to children by their parents, but certain parts of it, like women being demoted to birth-machines, harsh immigration and citizenship laws, and a stop of abortion aren't illegal opinions. Stuff like that needs to be stopped by public action and not by making it illegal...

yes, how dare they put the life of an unborn baby above the convenience of a woman?!

(sorry, couldn't resist. hehe)

yes, how dare they put the life of an unborn baby above the convenience of a woman?!

(sorry, couldn't resist. hehe)

It's the concept though, a baby can be reproduced at any juncture prior to the menopause, whereas the implications of an unnecessary, unwanted infant upon both the mother and child can be abhorrent, and serving only the satisfaction of the moral compulsions and principles of an entirely estranged and uninformed administration.

Incidentally, as an American citizen how on earth did you observe the broadcast in question? Furthermore, I can envisage life at a Christian only, essentially monastic university being tediously, immensely, painfully chaste and boring, since you lack the social experiance and capacity to interact that attending a "blasphemous, satanic university" would proffer one.

I implore you to mature, experiance the world and then return and discuss matters with the "big boys" when you are informed to the extent that you are qualified to do so.

Apologies. I reread the thread-starter and caught another point of topic that I missed.

Sure there are extremes within American politics. Plenty of those, Christians included, are out to impose their own standards upon others. This is, of course, wrong. I don't condone any politics of the sort. However, I don't limit my condemnation to just the far Christian Right. There are also extreme secularists who have similar agendas that need to be put in their place as well.

Secondly, nowhere have I claimed that anything but a Christian university was "blasphemous" or "satanic". Neither do I think I'd burn at the touch of students or professors at public and secular schools. I'm a bit more mature than that. I just feel that I get a better and more edifying teaching here and I don't see any problem with such schools. This opinion isn't limited to Christian schools either. Anyone who wants to teach outside of the secular "norm" should feel free to do so. Of course, it should become privatised schooling first.

Is the school chaste? For singles, sure. That follows Christian doctrine. Married couples are free to do as they please. However, this campus actually wants to encourage relationships, so we're not exactly being taught to be eunchs, we just restrict how sexual we go according to scripture. Is the school boring? To you maybe. I'm having a ball. So are many others. It's all a matter of opinion I suppose.

Lastly, I'll drop your insinuation that I'm not mature enough to discuss this topic. I merely stated that I have a right to learn what I wish to as does private schools have a right to teach what they wish. There's nothing wrong with this.

May I enquire as to why yuo felt any compulsion to support Bush?

i'll take that one

a)he's not a socialist... as such, he's more inclined than Gore or Kerry to expect people to be responsible for themselves... also to allow more financial freedom -- you keep more of what you earn (as you should).

b)he's not a pussy... he's taken the fight to the terrorists (and the terrorists keep coming to us in Iraq to be shot like fish in a barrel), taken down saddam, taken down the taliban, etc... all of which are justified.

c)He has morals, or at least as much dignity as most other politicians. He is certainly a saint compared to his sleaze-ball predecessor. This is not important to everyone, but it's important to me. I felt sick to my stomach when I saw Clinton on-screen telling us all how he did not.. have.. sexual.. relations.. with that woman. And then a bit later finding out that HE LIED. Some call Bush a liar... but there is absolutely no proof that he KNEW that WOMDs wouldn't be found in Iraq. (i question fiercely whether ALL of Iraq actually could possible have been searched. If the soil of every square inch hasn't been turned over, how can we be sure that there AREN'T WOMDs?). It cannot be proved that Bush lied (liberals: a lie is when you know that what you're saying isn't true... making a false prediction IS NOT A LIE).

d)What would Gore have done after 9/11... searched his lock box for a peaceful solution? Given in to the terrorists? I shudder to think.

Bush could be doing a lot better... for instance, social security should be paid off and then scrapped (it is, after all, just another tax... one of the Rooseveltian socialist acts still prominent today)... though it would piss off the unions and perhaps cost some skilled/specialized labor their jobs, we should go more for totally free trade... we haven't had a balanced budget yet (congress's fault too.... TOO MUCH PORK)... etc.

But the economy has withstood 9/11 because with tax cuts, additional money was freed up to be pumped into the economy... and the economy will survive Katrina. Bush hasn't been perfect, but most of what he's done can be fairly justified.

Apologies. I reread the thread-starter and caught another point of topic that I missed.

Sure there are extremes within American politics. Plenty of those, Christians included, are out to impose their own standards upon others. This is, of course, wrong. I don't condone any politics of the sort. However, I don't limit my condemnation to just the far Christian Right. There are also extreme secularists who have similar agendas that need to be put in their place as well.

Secondly, nowhere have I claimed that anything but a Christian university was "blasphemous" or "satanic". Neither do I think I'd burn at the touch of students or professors at public and secular schools. I'm a bit more mature than that. I just feel that I get a better and more edifying teaching here and I don't see any problem with such schools. This opinion isn't limited to Christian schools either. Anyone who wants to teach outside of the secular "norm" should feel free to do so. Of course, it should become privatised schooling first.

Is the school chaste? For singles, sure. That follows Christian doctrine. Married couples are free to do as they please. However, this campus actually wants to encourage relationships, so we're not exactly being taught to be eunchs, we just restrict how sexual we go according to scripture. Is the school boring? To you maybe. I'm having a ball. So are many others. It's all a matter of opinion I suppose.

Lastly, I'll drop your insinuation that I'm not mature enough to discuss this topic. I merely stated that I have a right to learn what I wish to as does private schools have a right to teach what they wish. There's nothing wrong with this.

Sorry, I simply had to endure seven years of having evangelism thrust upon me at primary school, and I will confess I am a little wary of all religiously insructed education. Prior to the age of eleven, I had recieved no illumination as to any faith or denomination beyond that of evengelical christianity, which is both tragic and deplorable.

Furthermore, I am compelled to concur in that an entirely secular state is one inherently flawed, since it is intrinsically bereft of moral direction and instruction, and simply proffers unfounded and at times unjustifiable legislation. However,as to scripture originating education and policy, I am somewhat concerned, sicne the legislative scriptures are at least two millenia old, and for the most part considerably older, and accordingly unsuitable for application to the modern world.

are you people crazy? freedom is what america is all about! if you guys want to go to a school where they teach you to be a communist dictator, that's your choice! it's not up to you to tell homeschoolers that they can't homeschool, and it's not up to homeschoolers to say that you have to be homeschooled. for homeschoolers to be homeschooled is not your choice to make. and vice versa.
we have the right to life, liberty, the pursut of happiness, the freedom of speech, religion, assembly, the press, and to petition the goverment. it's our first amedment right to be allowed to homeschooled and it's your first amendment right to be public schooled or private schooled.

and about this so-called "indoctrination", public and private schools do the same thing. whether the teaching is right, wrong, or otherwise, that's what education is. the very worrd doctrine, as stated by princeton university, is
"a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school". like it or not, it is everyone's right to believe in anything they choose, whether it be "christ is God", "Allah is god", "there is no God", or "ronald McDonald is god". another thing that bothers me is how you single out the "big bad christians". the heaven's gate (http://www.wave.net/upg/gate/) people tell thier kids that the aliens are coming to take them away to paradise, and i don't see you throwing the book at them.

It's the concept though, a baby can be reproduced at any juncture prior to the menopause, whereas the implications of an unnecessary, unwanted infant upon both the mother and child can be abhorrent, and serving only the satisfaction of the moral compulsions and principles of an entirely estranged and uninformed administration.

yet one might ask:

which is the lesser evil--

not having the right to live

or

not having the right to choose (or, "murder" to the more angry pro-lifers... i'm actually fairly neutral on the topic, and see points in both sides -- though i'm puzzled as to how a fetus is treated as inhuman by some -- perhaps it helps them feel better about killing it)

?

i'll take that one

a)he's not a socialist... as such, he's more inclined than Gore or Kerry to expect people to be responsible for themselves... also to allow more financial freedom -- you keep more of what you earn (as you should).


Neither Gore nor Kerry are 'socialists', either. This comment is, therefore, redundant. You may have noticed that the poor citizens are actually paying MORE now, than they were... Bush has only applied pressure for tax releief to the more wealthy. The poor are now loaded with a greater burden on medication costs, etc.


b)he's not a pussy... he's taken the fight to the terrorists (and the terrorists keep coming to us in Iraq to be shot like fish in a barrel), taken down saddam, taken down the taliban, etc... all of which are justified.


He has done nothing to the terrorists. The Taliban are back in the mountains, as they were during Soviet occupation, and as they will be when the US finally runs out of money or political will (think Viettnam), and attacking Saddam has nothing to do with terrorism - except for the fact that it created a new terrorism arena, and a new reason for terrorists to be 'born'.


c)He has morals, or at least as much dignity as most other politicians. He is certainly a saint compared to his sleaze-ball predecessor. This is not important to everyone, but it's important to me. I felt sick to my stomach when I saw Clinton on-screen telling us all how he did not.. have.. sexual.. relations.. with that woman. And then a bit later finding out that HE LIED. Some call Bush a liar... but there is absolutely no proof that he KNEW that WOMDs wouldn't be found in Iraq. (i question fiercely whether ALL of Iraq actually could possible have been searched. If the soil of every square inch hasn't been turned over, how can we be sure that there AREN'T WOMDs?). It cannot be proved that Bush lied (liberals: a lie is when you know that what you're saying isn't true... making a false prediction IS NOT A LIE).


Bush's morals are open to question. Does he no longer drink? Is he reformed? He is in one of the highest positions in the land, and... is he not the first American President this century to ENTER office with a criminal record?


d)What would Gore have done after 9/11... searched his lock box for a peaceful solution? Given in to the terrorists? I shudder to think.


Spurious, at best.

But hey, at least he might not have turned the unfortunate deaths of thousands into a false platform for a war he was already planning...


Bush could be doing a lot better... for instance, social security should be paid off and then scrapped (it is, after all, just another tax... one of the Rooseveltian socialist acts still prominent today)... though it would piss off the unions and perhaps cost some skilled/specialized labor their jobs, we should go more for totally free trade... we haven't had a balanced budget yet (congress's fault too.... TOO MUCH PORK)... etc.

But the economy has withstood 9/11 because with tax cuts, additional money was freed up to be pumped into the economy... and the economy will survive Katrina. Bush hasn't been perfect, but most of what he's done can be fairly justified.

The economy withstood 9/11 because 9/11 wasn't that big a deal. Katrina is more of a problem. Iraq is more of a problem.

And, "additional money" has not been "freed up".... Bush has just increased deficit spending.

Sorry, I simply had to endure seven years of having evangelism thrust upon me at primary school, and I will confess I am a little wary of all religiously insructed education. Prior to the age of eleven, I had recieved no illumination as to any faith or denomination beyond that of evengelical christianity, which is both tragic and deplorable.
I understand. Having to undergo seven years of proselitizing against your will is undoubtedly a very horrid experience, especially for one of such a young age. So your wariness does not go unwarranted.

It's of my opinion that it might be better for younger children to undergo more neutral of schooling. Once they reach an age to make their own ethical and spiritual decisions, they should be able to choose what line of learning they wish to follow. But only when they're ready. I'd rather not religion become more than anything but a choice.

Furthermore, I am compelled to concur in that an entirely secular state is one inherently flawed, since it is intrinsically bereft of moral direction and instruction, and simply proffers unfounded and at times unjustifiable legislation. However,as to scripture originating education and policy, I am somewhat concerned, sicne the legislative scriptures are at least two millenia old, and for the most part considerably older, and accordingly unsuitable for application to the modern world.

I'm inclined to disagree with you (respectfully however) that scriptural doctrine is entirely outdated. I believe that the core of scriptural instruction is meant to be standard for all generations, and should not change. However, there is plenty of scripture that fits more to the culture of the time and area, (i.e. women remaining silent in church/not becoming spiritual leaders, many laws about how one should dress, etc.) and would be safe to assume that we no longer conform to those cultures.

But I do agree that adolescent schooling should probably remain neutral. I went to public school all the way through high school and had no inherent problems with it. (Truthfully I didn't see the big deal as to why some parents would want to pull their children out for more "wholesome" teaching. :p) But now that I'm an adult, and am secure in my own beliefs, I think I'm responsible enough to take schooling that I deem the most edifying to me and the career that I wish to persue.

May I enquire as to why yuo felt any compulsion to support Bush?

Supported expanding the WOT, atleast gave some support to the 2nd Amendment, supported more restrictions on abortion, he's a Christian and pretty much supports most of the things I do, although his major FUBAR in setting the Feds and Local PDs on NO would preclude me voting for him again if he did run (theoretical).

Kerry may have claimed to be a catholic, but he certainly wasn't looked upon very fondly by Catholics.

There are plenty of excellent Christian schools and universities, as well as schools of other faiths, that give their students full, well-rounded educations and don't turn them into cultists. Also, all kinds of people homeschool for all kinds of reasons. Parochial education is not the problem.

The scary thing is the small group of extremists who are not *educating* their kids -- i.e., giving them a broad base of skills, information, and the ability to function as citizens in the open world. Instead, they are *training* their kids to carry out an agenda to make the open world conform to their personal beliefs. The most extreme minority are even preparing their kids for some ill-defined future conflict, as if they are looking forward to holy war. This is not religious instruction, but more like the doctrines of a paranoid cult. There is little difference between them and the kind of radical Islamic schools that do nothing but preach jihad to little boys. This extremist minority doesn't even have the support of most evangelicals and fundamentalists in the US.

When I said they had colleges and think tanks, I didn't mean established schools like Notre Dame University, but rather organizations such as The Heritage Foundation, which started out as a lobbying group and somehow parlayed itself into a policy consultant to the government and a regular pundit explaining US foreign policy on television news. All they ever did was complain about godlessness -- and create a Christian theme park down south somewhere -- and now all of a sudden they're experts on Iraq?

The college I was thinking of is Bob Roberts University, which seems use the bible as its primary textbook for every course on the calendar. A surprising number of new US politicians are graduates from it.

I think this extremist minority has failed to convert others by preaching and is now trying to do it through politics instead. They might not be able to force us to follow the bible, but they can force us to follow the law, right? All they have to do is make sure the law matches their religion. And before anyone says this is an unrealistic, paranoid scenario -- first, it's not even as organized or powerful yet as the Catholic church, and second, several ultra-religious US politicians, such as Senators Brownback and Frist, make no secret of their beliefs, which are clearly reflected in their speeches and public interviews.

i'll take that one

a)he's not a socialist... as such, he's more inclined than Gore or Kerry to expect people to be responsible for themselves... also to allow more financial freedom -- you keep more of what you earn (as you should).

He is a socialist, probably more so than Clinton. Bush follows Keynesian economic theory almost to the letter. Cutting taxes while increasing spending was no accident, it was designed to drive up the national debt.

Additionally, he is a supporter of "greater good" programmes. This is a socialist characteristic. The most prominent one is the Iraq war. Only a socialist at heart would spend so much money and make such sacrifice to free a nation from oppression.

Chew on that.

Gore's reaction to 9/11 would probably to have invaded Afghanistan, just like Bush. Frangland, the Republicans are not all that different from Democrats. How is it so hard for you to see that?

Also, despite my support for the Afghan regime change, I am curious as to why you imply that a peaceful solution is a bad thing? You characterise yourself as one who values life, but do you only value unborn life?

not having the right to choose (or, "murder" to the more angry pro-lifers... i'm actually fairly neutral on the topic, and see points in both sides -- though i'm puzzled as to how a fetus is treated as inhuman by some -- perhaps it helps them feel better about killing it)

You're neutral? How is that, when you talk about the evil of abortion constantly, and bring the topic into unrelated threads?

I've noticed a couple of hints of abortion-debate language popping up. Could we please not go down that road in this thread? It's too hot a topic and has nothing to do with the main topic.

Supported expanding the WOT, atleast gave some support to the 2nd Amendment, supported more restrictions on abortion, he's a Christian and pretty much supports most of the things I do, although his major FUBAR in setting the Feds and Local PDs on NO would preclude me voting for him again if he did run (theoretical).

Kerry may have claimed to be a catholic, but he certainly wasn't looked upon very fondly by Catholics.
I thought you were a libertarian (because you said that you preferred small government, and you like guns). I'm so disappointed.

Kerry wasn't looked upon fondly by most of his religion? Big deal, neither was Jesus!

I thought you were a libertarian (because you said that you preferred small government, and you like guns). I'm so disappointed.

Kerry wasn't looked upon fondly by most of his religion? Big deal, neither was Jesus! I like guns. I wouldn't trust the majority of people with them, mind, and I prefer swords.

Catholics are supposed to be united and follow the Church, so Arfy was justified.

Really, Bush is not a socialist. Socialism is related to DOMESTIC policy, not foreign policy. If he's a socialist, Thatcher is.

Really, Bush is not a socialist. Socialism is related to DOMESTIC policy, not foreign policy. If he's a socialist, Thatcher is.
I know that Bush is a not really a socialist, but he is much more so than most of his supporters want to admit.

Socialism extends to foreign policy too. Ever heard of internationalism?

What countries did Thatcher ever take over? She certainly never took it upon herself to liberate anyone from dictatorship.

The Falklands war was waged to advance her political career.

I know that Bush is a not really a socialist, but he is much more so than most of his supporters want to admit.

Socialism extends to foreign policy too. Ever heard of internationalism?

What countries did Thatcher ever take over? She certainly never took it upon herself to liberate anyone from dictatorship.

The Falklands war was waged to advance her political career.Oh come on. Argentina was a military dictatorship at the time and the Falklands were conquered by them (and the inhabitants were pretty British, not Argentine).
Mayhap she did it to advance her carreer, but something needed to happen.

I know that Bush is a not really a socialist, but he is much more so than most of his supporters want to admit.

Socialism extends to foreign policy too. Ever heard of internationalism?

What countries did Thatcher ever take over? She certainly never took it upon herself to liberate anyone from dictatorship.

The Falklands war was waged to advance her political career.
And bush didn't invade Iraq for egalitarian reasons either, thatsjust what the current line of doublespeack wants you to think. We invaded due to faulty inteligance regarding the existance of weapons of mass destruction. And he is only suporting a variation of kenisian(sp) economics with his tax cuts, FDRs progects would be an ecample of another style.

And bush didn't invade Iraq for egalitarian reasons either, thatsjust what the current line of doublespeack wants you to think. We invaded due to faulty inteligance regarding the existance of weapons of mass destruction. And he is only suporting a variation of kenisian(sp) economics with his tax cuts, FDRs progects would be an ecample of another style.


Incidentally, you are aware that had the very same invasion of Iraq been committed by another nation, Bush would have labelled them a dangerous, uncontrollable and inherently destructive state (possibly in a less elaborate manner)?

Incidentally, you are aware that had the very same invasion of Iraq been committed by another nation, Bush would have labelled them a dangerous, uncontrollable and inherently destructive state (possibly in a less elaborate manner)?

I don't think so. There's always the possibility, but it'd highly doubtful, as he had claimed before hints of a war that Saddam was a threatening dictator. He may have supported the invading nation, giving all aid needed.

But as this is all speculation, there's always the possibility of me being wrong. So I won't claim strong footing either way.