California: Judge orders homeschoolers into government education

[Independent Operator]

That's very much justified. The government gave itself an obligation to maintaining basic literacy in children, and provides a well-intentioned service for parents who cannot afford to send their children to private schools. Even those that can will use the public schools. Withholding a child from public school is cause for concern, when the parent does not say anything about it. The child could have been murdered, as an extreme example.

well, there you have it, all home schoolers parents are simply waiting to murder their children, and to hide their devious plans to torture and dumb-down their kids.

btw, your literacy leaves much to be desired. you are obviously a product of a some kind of system.

you are stupid!!

 

[Tdcci]

Christian hate and violence? Do you mean teaching children that God forbids homosexuality?

That is not “hate”…..

That among other tales of rape, murder, and child abuse in the bible.

Why don’t you grab all the parents that follow your pagan god and make a little Gomorrah School to tech your kind whatever you want.

I'm not a pagan. It's shocking to you, I know, but some people can get by without adhering to any religion at all.

Leave Christian kids alone because they belong to God. You pervert pedophile.

Typical.

 

[Tdcci]

well, there you have it, all home schoolers parents are simply waiting to murder their children, and to hide their devious plans to torture and dumb-down their kids.

I didn't say that. You're the ones saying that the system exists to dumb down kids.

btw, your literacy leave much to be desired. you are obviously a product of a some kind of system.

you are stupid!!

lol

 

[Independent Operator]

I didn't say that. You're the ones saying that the system exists to dumb down kids.

it does, and we have you as the prime example.

 

[Fox McCloud]

Tdcci, I often times wonder if you should really be supporting the candidate in your picture--some of your statements and philosophies are out and out collectivism, which, by the by, if you haven't caught on by now--Ron Paul completely and utterly opposes.

Also, just because someone is personally against something doesn't mean they automatically "hate" that. I'm against homosexuality, I'm against drugs, I'm against getting drunk (fine with drinking alcohol though), I'm against evolution....HOWEVER, that doesn't mean I'm going to impose my views on others or that I automatically hate all those things. Now, if I talk to someone about why I personally oppose "X" issue, and they agree (where as they, before disagreed), it doesn't mean I'm indoctrinating/brainwashing/forcing them to believe in those things--I proposed something and provided evidence to back up my position, and they thought about it and agreed.

Likewise, someone could approach someone to be pro-issue "X" and convince someone...I might not like it, and feel they are in the wrong, but so long as they don't harm an individual and it's not forced down their throat, then it is not indoctrination.

Once upon a time, in the 1800's, school was optional, and not forced...last I checked, we were still the most prosperous country in the world, during that time period...Man, we really farked up with that one, society nearly collapsed since education wasn't forced.... [/sarcasm]. The Constitution doesn't guarantee public schooling or anything else--it merely protects our rights and let's us pursue happiness.

 

[gutteck]

That among other tales of rape, murder, and child abuse in the bible.



I'm not a pagan. It's shocking to you, I know, but some people can get by without adhering to any religion at all.



Typical.

Are you a registered sex offender?

 

[Tdcci]

it does, and we have you as the prime example.

As a shining example of humility and tolerance among a sea of Christian hatemongers? Why thank you.

 

[Tdcci]

Tdcci, I often times wonder if you should really be supporting the candidate in your picture--some of your statements and philosophies are out and out collectivism, which, by the by, if you haven't caught on by now--Ron Paul completely and utterly opposes.

How is what I said collectivism? Singling out gay people seems more like collectivism to me.

I proposed something and provided evidence to back up my position, and they thought about it and agreed.

This has me curious. Show me your 'evidence' to back up your position on homosexuality.

Once upon a time, in the 1800's, school was optional, and not forced...last I checked, we were still the most prosperous country in the world, during that time period...

We still are.

Man, we really farked up with that one, society nearly collapsed since education wasn't forced.... [/sarcasm].

I did not say or imply that society would collapse if schooling was not mandatory. You Christians are the ones saying society would collapse if gay marriage were legalized (despite MANY countries showing the contrary)

The Constitution doesn't guarantee public schooling or anything else--it merely protects our rights and let's us pursue happiness.

Correct. The Constitution does not guarantee political parties either, but it does not expressly forbid them.

 

[danberkeley]

I'd rather our children be sent to war to conquer another nation than fight arabs for Israel.

............................... Huh? Well, according to the logic in your other posts, the fact that you do not want our childen to fight Arabs for Isreal makes you an anti-semite, hate-mongerer, and a bigot. lol

 

[Tdcci]

............................... Huh? Well, according to the logic in your other posts,

Don't try that, you'll twist it. Here is a proper application of my logic:

Sending our children off to kill to please a god is bad, because there is no benefit, except to the Military-Industrial-Church complex.

Sending our children off to conquer other nations is better, because America profits from the natural resources of the nation, taxing the natives, etc.

 

[danberkeley]

You Christians are the ones saying society would collapse if gay marriage were legalized (despite MANY countries showing the contrary).

What countries are predominately gay?

Correct. The Constitution does not guarantee political parties either, but it does not expressly forbid them.

Yes it does. They are expressly forbidden at the federal level.

 

[Tdcci]

What countries are predominately gay?

None

Yes it does. They are expressly forbidden at the federal level.

Where?

 

[gutteck]

Yes! If they are taught that it is wrong, they will be ashamed of themselves and their feelings, which they shouldn't be! This is social progress. Just a century or two ago, they were taught heterosexual kissing before marriage was wrong!



It's not all I care about, it is one thing I care about. The sad fact of the matter is that the vast majority of homeschooled kids are being indoctrinated with Christian hate and violence.



I'd rather our children be sent to war to conquer another nation than fight arabs for Israel.

Here are my observations:

Why do you want children to learn tolerance towards gays?

You want acceptance.

Why do you have a problem with Christianity?

Because Christianity forbids homosexuality therefore Christians don’t accept your lifestyle.

Why children? Why not adults?

There is the real concern. Children are just Children and somehow you see them as equally intelligent and mature to understand your needs and sexual deviations. The problem is that you see them as equal and that is a sign to keep you away from them.

A bet my shoes that you are a registered sex offender.

 

[danberkeley]

Sending our children off to kill to please a god is bad, because there is no benefit, except to the Military-Industrial-Church complex.

Sending our children off to conquer other nations is better, because America profits from the natural resources of the nation, taxing the natives, etc.

Fine. If this is the proper application of your logic, then they are both unconstitutional. That's the point of "How do we know the government isn't training our children to send them to war to conquer
another nation?".

 

[Tdcci]

Here are my observations:

Why do you want children to learn tolerance towards gays?

You want acceptance.

Why do I want children to learn tolerance towards blacks? Not because I'm black, but because I want to see a better world.

Why do you have a problem with Christianity?

Because Christianity forbids homosexuality therefore Christians don’t accept your lifestyle.

That's not the reason I have a problem with Christianity, though it doesn't help. The primary reason is that it's dangerous for society (as well as other Abrahamic religions). If people don't see death as the end of everything, they will have no problem with suicide bombing, or dealing death to others.

Why children? Why not adults?

You could just ask me without giving me your answer. My answer is: Children are very impressionable and susceptible to obeying authority. The evolutionary reason for this is that parents know more, and would help the child survive. Unfortunately, the Christian parents are wrong on a number of things.

There is the real concern. Children are just Children and somehow you see them as equally intelligent and mature to understand your needs and sexual deviations.

I don't think that. I remember discussing this with you in another thread, and I explained that teaching homosexual tolerance is not about teaching them sexual intercourse, but how some humans are wired differently; to be attracted to the same sex, instead of the opposite. Just like how some humans are born with blue, or green eyes instead of brown and you shouldn't fear them

The problem is that you see them as equal and that is a sign to keep you away from them.

A bet my shoes that you are a registered sex offender.

I think you should be kept away from children, that kind of hatred is poisonous. I am not a "registered sex offender" by the way, I didn't answer the first time you asked because it was an attack on my character instead of an attack on my argument.

 

[Tdcci]

Fine. If this is the proper application of your logic, then they are both unconstitutional.

Where does the constitution prohibit colonialism?
I suspect you're throwing around "unconstitutional" without knowing what it actually means.

 

[Independent Operator]

There is the real concern. Children are just Children and somehow you see them as equally intelligent and mature to understand your needs and sexual deviations. The problem is that you see them as equal and that is a sign to keep you away from them.

you hit the proverbial "nail on the head." they somehow think that children are like reasoned adults, and that they have the intellectual capacity to decipher all of the craziness thrown at them - they do not. i mean that is what learning is supposed to be about: you raise and teach a child so that when he is confronted with these issues he has the capacity to make a correct and healthy decision. you don't just throw a child into the cauldron and expect him to understand anything.

A bet my shoes that you are a registered sex offender.

that is probably going a bit too far, but i will add that the above philosophy you stated is the same philosophy held by NAMBLA. NAMBLA sees children as equals - fucking sickos!!!!!

i think that stupid is more of an apt description of Tdcci . Tdcci is simply not that intelligent.

 

[danberkeley]

Where does the constitution prohibit colonialism? I
suspect you're throwing around "unconstitutional" without knowing what it
actually means.

Damn it. I just finished reading your posts on other threads. You need to realize
that any power not expressly delegated to the federal government in the
Constitution is retained by the states.

To quote from the John Birch Society: "Shall not. Shall not. Shall not. Shall not. All
the way to the tenth Amendment. And if we forgot anything, you (the federal
government) can't do that either."

 

[danberkeley]

i think that stupid is more of an apt description of Tdcci . Tdcci is simply not that intelligent.

i wouldn't go that far. i think ignorant and misguided are more appropriate.

 

[Tdcci]

you hit the proverbial "nail on the head." they somehow think that children are like reasoned adults, and that they have the intellectual capacity to decipher all of the craziness thrown at them - they do not. i mean that is what learning is supposed to be about: you raise and teach a child so that when he is confronted with these issues he has the capacity to make a correct and healthy decision. you don't just throw a child into the cauldron and expect him to understand anything.

There are two conflicting opinions here. One is

1) Teach children that homosexuality is wrong and homosexuals should be condemned and do not deserve equal rights. Dehumanize them to hold the child's empathy, just as it was done to blacks back in the day.

2) Teach children that there is nothing wrong with homosexuals, they are people just like you and I, and that homosexual hatred is irrational and the bigots should be condemned (last part optional).

Doesn't it seem like option number 1 would require that you teach children exactly what homosexuality is as the church defines it? Because the church defines it by sex, and the normal scientific world defines it by attraction.

that is probably going a bit too far, but i will add that the above philosophy you stated is the same philosophy held by NAMBLA. NAMBLA sees children as equals - fucking sickos!!!!!

i think that stupid is more of an apt description of Tdcci . Tdcci is simply not that intelligent.

I don't think any reasonable adult can conclude that children are "equal" (otherwise, why would we use a different word to describe them?), do you have their mission statement or an equivilant?