Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Allowing people to make parental decisions is the "extremist" position? On the contrary, the claim that some nebulous "public interest" takes precedence over the natural relationship between parent and child that has existed for millions of years is extremist, on top of being idiotic.
Of course they are. That's the very definition of statism: the belief that the government's "interests" take precedence over individual rights.
Fascism is just one of the many flavors of statism. So they don't want complete and total control? How nice of them.
All those who cannot teach competently should not be allowed to teach.
Your second paragraph is an anarchist screed that makes on sense.
Third, "criminal" can be a connotative term: look it up.
But our schools are filled with teachers who won't teach.
More doctors lose their license to practice medicine then teacher lose their license, and our educational system continue to fall further and further behind the rest of the world
Why do you defend the Progressive Intellectual pedophilia that's practiced in our schools?
The question is: who gets to decide, parents, or the state?
Allowing people to make parental decisions is the "extremist" position? On the contrary, the claim that some nebulous "public interest" takes precedence over the natural relationship between parent and child that has existed for millions of years is extremist, on top of being idiotic.
Congratulations, you beat up a straw man..
Of course they are. That's the very definition of statism: the belief that the government's "interests" take precedence over individual rights.
That is not at all the definition. Your ignorance knows no limits.
Fascism is just one of the many flavors of statism. So they don't want complete and total control? How nice of them.
Again, your ignorance knows no limits. The very existence of a sovereign state is an act of statism. If you want to do away with that, then that makes you an anarchist.
My words always have meaning, for they involve a real world, where anarchism is simply true gibberish.
All incompetent teachers, I agree, should be removed.
For a long time the courts declared child labor laws as unconstitutional under the contract provisions of the Constitution. The states still believing the use of child labor was wrong so to beat those decisions, they dreamed up laws making compulsory education mandatory. Now kids had to go to school instead of work. Maybe it's time we dump the mandatory school laws and get kids back into the work force? Child labor is so much cheaper and easier to manage compared to adults and their labor unions, their minimum wages, their strikes and so forth.
What does your idiocy have to do with home schooling?
As some parents have shown before they would rather their children worked than go to school. Has that changed?
It seems the home schooling requirements are set by the home, even the hours spent in class all decided by the home. Are all parents today that enamored with education, or that able to provide a competent education? Would some parents give more credits for work-experience? And in the end, would there be a new state bureaucracy that would supervise home education?
I think every state should have some regulations on home schooling as well as having help available to parents who choose to take that path. We recognize that having an educated population benefits everyone. This is why we have broad tax bases to support public schools, truancy laws, graduation requirements, and teacher qualification. And for that reason there should be requirements for home schooling.That is exactly the point.
Then we have no argument. To be clear, what I'm opposed to is the presumption of guilt inherent in the regulatory state in general.
Neither are there true answers found in hedging the middle. We stake out our values and principles where we find them.
Going back to my earlier point, "we the people" i.e. the government/society do have a justifiable reason to interfere in a person's choices regarding their children. It's ridiculous to say it doesn't. The correct thing to say is that there are substantial limits to when exercising such power can and should be used.
By the same token, someone suggesting that the government should exercise such power are not necessarily "statists." And for that matter, the idea you are trying to express is not actually statism. It's more akin to totalitarian fascism. Either way, the point is that such a person does not necessarily want or advocate for the government to have complete and total control over the people.
Indeed it is 'fascism'. And you're right, even totalitarian fascists don't, necessarily, want or advocate for the government to have complete and total control. Sometimes they only shoot for 95%.
The point is, the power you want government to have is far more insidious than simply the power intervene if cases of abuse and neglect. You claim that the state has a compelling interest in the well-being of your children, as though your children, or the potential citizens they represent, are somehow the property of the state; it's this very attitude I'm rejecting. The state belongs to us, not the other way around.
I think you misunderstand. I'm not advocating for the bill in question. And the person who is sponsoring it has made nothing but stupid arguments for it. But I don't think it's an inherently unreasonable idea either. It would have to be executed well, and be carefully designed. Ultimately, when dealing with state issues when I'm not a resident, I generally defer to supporting what the people of said state want.
My words always have meaning, for they involve a real world, where anarchism is simply true gibberish.
All incompetent teachers, I agree, should be removed.
If failing to teach is child abuse, then they should be arrested and locked up, don't you agree?
My words always have meaning, for they involve a real world, where anarchism is simply true gibberish.
All incompetent teachers, I agree, should be removed.
If failing to teach is child abuse, then they should be arrested and locked up, don't you agree?
I think you go too far to want to lock them up.
But we could stop them from teaching, yes.
If failing to teach is child abuse, then they should be arrested and locked up, don't you agree?
I think you go too far to want to lock them up.
But we could stop them from teaching, yes.
ROFL! Says the guy who thinks you need a teaching certificate to teach your own kid.
IF failing to teach is child abuse, then they should be locked up. Otherwise, you have no business accusing anyone who teaches his own children of child abuse for not meeting some arbitrary state imposed standard.
I think you go too far to want to lock them up.
But we could stop them from teaching, yes.
ROFL! Says the guy who thinks you need a teaching certificate to teach your own kid.
IF failing to teach is child abuse, then they should be locked up. Otherwise, you have no business accusing anyone who teaches his own children of child abuse for not meeting some arbitrary state imposed standard.
(1) I said be certified, son, nothing about a teaching certificate.
(2) Your argument fell apart as it was turned back on you.
(No anarchist will ever be able to tell the state what to do about certification of home schooling.
I think every state should have some regulations on home schooling as well as having help available to parents who choose to take that path. We recognize that having an educated population benefits everyone. This is why we have broad tax bases to support public schools, truancy laws, graduation requirements, and teacher qualification. And for that reason there should be requirements for home schooling.
At a minimum, anyone that home schools should be required to meet some educational requirements, cover the same basic subjects taught in public schools, keep records of student attendance and progress, and have the student tested yearly. If the student is doing poorly in a home schooling environment, then the state should require that student attend public or private schools.
We all have an interest in the education of the young. We should have minimum standards. If we don't, then we just as well repeal truancy laws and make education optional.
Libtruds have always hated home schooling because they can't stand the idea that not every child is subjected to government brainwashing. This is just one of the numerous attempts they have made to quash homeschooling and force all children into the government indoctrination mills.
Bill Would Require State Approval to Homeschool | The Arizona Conservative
Ohio State Senator Capri Cafaro (D-Hubbard) has introduced legislation to boost state regulation of homeschooling. Senate Bill 248 would require that parents be investigated and approved before being allowed to homeschool their children.
The very fact that parents would want to deny their children the enriching experience of a public school education raises a red flag, Cafaro declared. It makes one wonder what other risks of neglect or abuse might be present in the home environment. Rather than supinely wait for tragedies to occur it is incumbent upon the government to intercede ahead of time.
Cafaro hypothesized that overt signs of excessive religious fervor, gun ownership, or the presence of books and magazines that denigrate progressive values and undermine loyalty to and faith in the efforts of the government to better peoples lives would demonstrate an anti-social environment that is unfit for children.
The Senator acknowledged that there are likely too many anti-social home environments for us to take the most appropriate remedy of removing the afflicted children. We should at least insist that the children attend public schools as a way of counterbalancing these pernicious influences on their education and development.
Libtruds have always hated home schooling because they can't stand the idea that not every child is subjected to government brainwashing. This is just one of the numerous attempts they have made to quash homeschooling and force all children into the government indoctrination mills.
Bill Would Require State Approval to Homeschool | The Arizona Conservative
Ohio State Senator Capri Cafaro (D-Hubbard) has introduced legislation to boost state regulation of homeschooling. Senate Bill 248 would require that parents be investigated and approved before being allowed to homeschool their children.
The very fact that parents would want to deny their children the enriching experience of a public school education raises a red flag, Cafaro declared. It makes one wonder what other risks of neglect or abuse might be present in the home environment. Rather than supinely wait for tragedies to occur it is incumbent upon the government to intercede ahead of time.
Cafaro hypothesized that overt signs of excessive religious fervor, gun ownership, or the presence of books and magazines that denigrate progressive values and undermine loyalty to and faith in the efforts of the government to better peoples lives would demonstrate an anti-social environment that is unfit for children.
The Senator acknowledged that there are likely too many anti-social home environments for us to take the most appropriate remedy of removing the afflicted children. We should at least insist that the children attend public schools as a way of counterbalancing these pernicious influences on their education and development.
Lanza was home-schooled.
Loughner was Home-Schooled.
They probably have a point.
Some where home-schooled, some were privately schooled.
But that isn't the point, is it? In a public school, you would have had a professional that would have recognized something wasn't right and gotten professional help.
Some where home-schooled, some were privately schooled.
But that isn't the point, is it? In a public school, you would have had a professional that would have recognized something wasn't right and gotten professional help.
It doesn't seem to have worked, now does it?
Some where home-schooled, some were privately schooled.
But that isn't the point, is it? In a public school, you would have had a professional that would have recognized something wasn't right and gotten professional help.
It doesn't seem to have worked, now does it?
Can you cite a specific case where it didn't?
ROFL! Says the guy who thinks you need a teaching certificate to teach your own kid.
IF failing to teach is child abuse, then they should be locked up. Otherwise, you have no business accusing anyone who teaches his own children of child abuse for not meeting some arbitrary state imposed standard.
(1) I said be certified, son, nothing about a teaching certificate.
ROFL! So "being certified" doesn't mean getting a teaching certificate?
You're a hoot, Fakey.
(2) Your argument fell apart as it was turned back on you.
When did that happen? I must have missed it.
(No anarchist will ever be able to tell the state what to do about certification of home schooling.
Infantile babble.
(1) I said be certified, son, nothing about a teaching certificate.
ROFL! So "being certified" doesn't mean getting a teaching certificate?
You're a hoot, Fakey.
When did that happen? I must have missed it.
(No anarchist will ever be able to tell the state what to do about certification of home schooling.
Infantile babble.
Son, you are an avowed anarchists, which means you babble to the rest of us when you write. Tis what tis.
Libtruds have always hated home schooling because they can't stand the idea that not every child is subjected to government brainwashing. This is just one of the numerous attempts they have made to quash homeschooling and force all children into the government indoctrination mills.
Bill Would Require State Approval to Homeschool | The Arizona Conservative
Ohio State Senator Capri Cafaro (D-Hubbard) has introduced legislation to boost state regulation of homeschooling. Senate Bill 248 would require that parents be investigated and approved before being allowed to homeschool their children.
The very fact that parents would want to deny their children the enriching experience of a public school education raises a red flag, Cafaro declared. It makes one wonder what other risks of neglect or abuse might be present in the home environment. Rather than supinely wait for tragedies to occur it is incumbent upon the government to intercede ahead of time.
Cafaro hypothesized that overt signs of excessive religious fervor, gun ownership, or the presence of books and magazines that denigrate progressive values and undermine loyalty to and faith in the efforts of the government to better peoples lives would demonstrate an anti-social environment that is unfit for children.
The Senator acknowledged that there are likely too many anti-social home environments for us to take the most appropriate remedy of removing the afflicted children. We should at least insist that the children attend public schools as a way of counterbalancing these pernicious influences on their education and development.
