Thoughts From A Conservative Mom

Archive for the ‘Parental Rights’ Category

Think about it. Out of all the world regimes over the past century, which ones do you think would be most opposed to homeschooling? Nazi Germany, communist Russia, and nations enforcing Islamic Sharia Law first come to mind. And what is the common tie to all of these? Control. Unfortunately, with socialist agendas sweeping the globe, the mindless conformity of youth through indoctrination at government-run schools to the government’s point of view on social, political, and moral issues is a top priority of many nations falsely aspiring for a global community of “tolerance.”

But today, the suppression of parental rights to teach and influence their own children isn’t restricted to overtly fascist regimes. Take a look at Sweden, home of Ikea and Volvos. A couple months ago in June, attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund and the Home School Legal Defense Association filed Johansson v. Sweden with the European Court of Human Rights so that that the Swedish government will return a seven-year-old homeschooled boy to his parents. Dominic Johansson was forcibly seized by Swedish authorities from his parents in June 2009 after they had boarded a plane in their move to India. The reason? He was homeschooled. No warrant was issued before taking him into state custody, and the family was charged with no crime. Young Dominic was abducted because officials deemed home instruction to be an unsuitable method of raising a child, insisting that the government knows better about how to rear children.

Dominic is now in foster care and attends a government school. Heartbreakingly, his parents are only allowed to see their son for one hour every five weeks. To “justify” their action, Swedish authorities cited the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and quite shockingly, the White House and some members of Congress have expressed interest in ratifying this authoritarian treaty so that this type of government control could be exercised on our shores.

Despite the proliferating homeschooling movement in the U.S., with between two and four million children now being taught from home, the education and judicial systems have had a hard time leaving the influence of youth to their parents. Case in point: In the Matter of Kurowski and Kurowski, a legal matter that demonstrates how the courts have leaned toward state influence over parental influence when it comes to the education of children. Following a divorce, the father of 10-year-old homeschooled Amanda Kurowski had second thoughts about his former wife homeschooling their daughter, even though she performed well both socially and academically. The father contended that his daughter’s strong Christian beliefs needed to be sifted and challenged in a public school setting, and the lower court agreed in July 2009, issuing an order for her to enroll in a government-run school and discontinue homeschooling.

Now, of course, sometimes divorced parents do not agree on details of how to raise their child. Courts may rightly be called to resolve such disputes. But a judge must exercise the right standards when called upon to break a deadlock. When a dispute between these parents arose over homeschooling, the court looked past traditional arguments and made the chilling observation that Amanda’s “vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view.” In other words, the court was attempting to say that it knows better than a parent when a child is getting too much religious teaching. Such reasoning goes to show that, even in the U.S., it has become a main priority of public schools to challenge and convert students’ thinking to reflect that of the state, rather than those espoused at home.

Read more at Advancing Religious Liberty

Court orders Christian homeschooled girl to attend public school

California Court Rules Homeschooling Illegal

Swedish court refuses to return homeschool boy to family

US grants home schooling German family political asylum

The Shocking Origins of Public Education

Threat to Parents’ Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child

I’m proud to join the ranks of homeschooling parents this fall, as I begin teaching Kindergarten with my oldest, 5-year-old Eva.  It’s going to be an adventure, having a preschooler and one-year-old in the mix, but completely worth it!

This fall, as moms and dads around the country are getting backpacks stuffed with pencils and notebooks and scissors and glue, ready for their children to take to school, a rapidly increasing number of families are sending their children … nowhere.

Instead, more and more parents are opting to educate their children at home. In fact, statistics show the number of homeschooled students in the U.S. has nearly doubled over the past 10 years, making learning at home the fastest growing form of education in country.

“Homeschooling grew from 1.7 percent of the school age population in 1999 to 2.9 percent in 2007, a 74 percent relative increase over 8 years,” states Dr. Brian D. Ray of the National Home Education Research Institute.

And according to a NHERI fact sheet, those percentages have continued to climb. NHERI estimates the homeschooling movement has been growing at 5-12 percent per annum over the past several years, a quicker clip than private schools are growing, while public schools are seeing their percentages decline.

The total number of students now forgoing school buses for learning at home is best estimated in the neighborhood of 1.9 million – 2.5 million children.

“The increasing popularity of homeschooling should not come as a surprise,” claims a statement from The Old Schoolhouse Magazine, a popular periodical for home educators. “Parent-led, home-based education is now bordering on ‘mainstream’ in the United States.”

Read more at World Net Daily

Forced Participation: Public Education’s Fatal Flaw

Homeschooling: Socialization not a problem

In April, 2002, Minnesota parents concerned about curriculum content in a freshman class at Big Lake High School were invited to sit in on the class and see the content for themselves. That is, until principal Darrel Easterly found out. Suddenly, the morning of their scheduled visits, several moms learned that they had been banned from the school due to “privacy laws.” Mary Stultz, one of the moms, was stunned. “I was in total shock and spent the morning talking to a lawyer,” Stultz told writer Laura Adelmann at the time.

Another mom called Big Lake Superintendent Bob Lageson, who assured her it “should never happen again.” Yet, within weeks, the local school board was meeting to discuss adopting a policy requiring parents to make an appointment three days in advance of a visit, and granting to the principal wide discretion to prevent parents from entering the building even then.

After an unprecedented public outcry, the school board softened the three day requirement for parents of students to merely “as much advance notice as possible” – but they passed the new restriction. They even granted to the principal authority to detain unauthorized visitors until law enforcement arrives, citing criminal trespass laws.

Today, the current student handbook (pp.7-8) declares that “Big Lake High School does not allow students to bring guests or visitors to classes,” which includes parents. Even more importantly, the events that unfolded in Big Lake have played out numerous other times as well, throughout the country. And the courts have consistently upheld such decisions.

The proposed Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution can halt the erosion of parental rights nation-wide, and restore to parents the right to visit their child and see what is being taught. This will not allow individual parents to shape curriculum for an entire school, but it will allow any parent to remain informed of classroom content, and hopefully to opt their child out of material they find offensive.

Please act to protect the right of concerned parents to monitor their child’s education. Sign the petition and get more information at ParentalRights.org.

Parents of 50 Million U.S. Children Soon to Lose Parental Rights

An Action Alert from ParentalRights.org:

If your children attend public school, you are among those parents whose rights will end the moment your child enters the school. That’s because in 2005 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found in Fields v. Palmdale School District “that the Meyer-Pierce right [of parents to direct the upbringing of their children] does not exist beyond the threshold of the school door.”

You read that right. Parental Rights “[do] not exist beyond the threshold of the school door.”

“We conclude that the parents are possessed of no constitutional right to prevent the public schools from providing information on the subject [of sexuality] to their students in any forum or manner they select” (emphasis added).

Of course, most parents contend they don’t have a choice in where their children are schooled. Either economic constraints or personal circumstances leave them with no practical alternative to the local public school. And that leaves no parental rights at all.

Please act to reverse this assault by big government courts against parental rights. Sign the petition and get more information at ParentalRights.org.

Then, please pass this on. Every parent of a public school student needs to know the extent to which the courts have robbed them of their rights. Add this message to your Facebook account, or it on virtually any other social network.

Looking Ahead

This is the first of several court cases we plan to review for you in the coming weeks. The courts’ disregard for the traditional formative role of parents in a child’s life needs to be brought to light. And while the Parental Rights Amendment will not give parents any greater power to control the school’s choice of curriculum, it will protect their right to pull their individual child out of any program of an outrageous or offensive nature, like the program in the Palmdale case. (To read more from this case, click here.)

Sincerely,

Michael Ramey
Communications Director

School condom distribution program includes first graders, denies parental notification

Threat to Parents’ Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child

The Original Tea Party

View on YouTube

The Civil War and Gilded Age

View on YouTube

Progressivism

View on YouTube

FDR’s State And LBJ’s Society

View on YouTube

Big Gov’t and Tea Parties

View on YouTube

The Constitution and Freedom

Woodrow Wilson and the roots of Progressivism

Barack Obama and “The Second Bill of Rights”

America’s Ruling Class – And the Perils of Revolution

We the Serfs

WHO has changed how the constitution is interpreted?

From the Cascade Policy Institute:

On August 2, 2010, 77 public schools in Oregon were sanctioned for missing federal performance targets two years in a row—more schools than ever before. These schools now must offer students free tutoring or priority rights to transfer to another school. Education, sadly, has become such a highly politicized issue that only when schools fail are students free to pursue other educational options, most notably public charter schools. Students in non-failing schools, however, do not have this same freedom. The politicization of public charter schools by elected and appointed officials, politicians and the state teachers’ unions has effectively stifled educational choice and the growth of charter schools.

Charter schools are public schools run by private organizations. These schools, which enjoy bipartisan support in many other states, have been viewed with suspicion and contempt in Oregon. They were originally described in ORS 338.015 as “a legitimate avenue for parents, educators and community members to take responsible risks to create new, innovative and more flexible ways of educating children within the public school system,” and as a point of access to better education for children not reaching their full potential in the traditional public school environment. But burdened with stringent regulation, charter schools are rarely treated as the opportunities envisioned when the Oregon legislature first created the statutes that provided for public charter schools. Instead, they are seen as financial drains on traditional public education, even though they run on a fraction of the budget of traditional schools.

Oregon parents, regardless of their political affiliation, are eager for educational options that suit their children’s unique needs. Many parents choose a charter school because of its educational style or method, such as the Montessori technique (which focuses on learning through children’s natural curiosity and desire to explore). Before Oregon’s charter schools existed, only those parents who could afford private education could have enrolled their children in more diverse or innovative schools.

Virtual charter schools (charter schools that operate through an online platform) are another valuable alternative to traditional public schools, especially for students living in rural areas. Often, because the student population is not large enough to support a brick-and-mortar charter school, children in these areas are forced to attend the local public school. Virtual charter schools are essential to providing these students with the same educational options that a child living in a larger city would have. Virtual schools are also a vital option for students with medical problems or learning disabilities that prevent them from performing at their best in the traditional classroom environment. Online learning allows them to work at their own pace and to have a highly individualized education.

Providing our children with diverse and innovative educational options should not be a political issue. While the Oregon Education Association may resent the charter school system because its teachers are not required to join the teachers’ union and pay dues, and though some politicians have unfairly characterized the charters as a blow against free state-provided education, the parents who want the best for their children do not see it as a political issue. They see charter schools as a better chance for their children to get an education specifically tailored to their needs and learning styles, which they could not have afforded otherwise. It’s time to leave the politics behind and realize that educational choice and excellence is an issue we can all support.

Parent of an Online Charter School Student Testifies for Choices in Education

Unions on the warpath against “moderate” Dems and charter schools

Stealth Education Overhaul

Forced Participation: Public Education’s Fatal Flaw

Empowering education

Education: Too Important for a Government Monopoly

It’s time to approve school choice

Economics 101: School Choice Example Shows Why Government Monopolies Are Bad

Education And The Founding Fathers

View on YouTube

Before hurricane Katrina ravaged the city in 2005, New Orleans had one of the worst performing public school districts in the nation. Katrina forced nearly a million people to leave their homes and caused almost $100 billion in damages. To an already failing public school system, the storm seemed to provide the final deathblow. But then something amazing happened. In the wake of Katrina, education reformers decided to seize the opportunity and start fresh with a system based on choice.

Today, New Orleans has the most market-based school system in the US. Sixty percent of New Orleans students currently attend charter schools, test scores are up, and talented and passionate educators from around the country are flocking to New Orleans to be a part of the education revolution. It’s too early to tell if the New Orleans experiment in school choice will succeed over the long term, but for the first time in decades people are optimistic about the future of New Orleans schools.

It’s time to approve school choice

Author and blogger Barbara Curtis is raising the alarm for parents:

My daughter Samantha went through this last year in our neighboring Clarke County – writing letters to the principle, school board, newspapers. She went door to door with a petition and when people would look at her like she was a crazy book banner – she would ask them to listen a minute while she read aloud something from one of the questionable books.

They listened. They signed.

Many parents have their heads in the sand. Even if they look at their children’s reading lists, recommended reading has changed so radically since you and I were in school – even considering the generations – that you would be appalled to find out what kids are required to read.

Citizen Magazine reports:

“Some of the material being recommended for use in schools by national gay-activist groups includes what I would consider Triple X-type material,” said Candi Cushman, education analyst for CitizenLink. “These depictions are so extreme that you wouldn’t expect to find them anywhere but a porn store.”

Students may be forced to confront these texts as mandatory reading in a literature or socialstudies class. Or they may be suggested by teachers, or available as options. Sometimes, such material appears on summer reading lists either as required or available reading.

Often, objectionable books simply occupy shelf space in school libraries. In any event, the insistence of many public educators to bring brazenly sexual, often homosexual-themed, books and stories into the mainstream is a growing threat to the moral maturation of American highschool students.

This material doesn’t just yield the relatively harmless peccadilloes of a previous generation of scandalizing literature, such as the occasional profanity in Catcher in the Rye. Much of the modern variety appears to have no other purpose than to centralize homosexuality or to sensationalize edgy heterosexual practice in ways that young readers can’t easily forget.

“Parents have the right to object to sexually explicit material that their child isn’t emotionally or psychologically ready to handle, and many students are being inundated by this stuff,” Cushman said. Urging parents to intervene against such assignments isn’t a common message these days. “Parents are told that they have no control over their kids in the public schools, that states will decide these things,” said Phil Burress, president of Citizens for Community Values, a Cincinnati-based affiliate of Focus on the Family. “And that kind of thinking is gaining even more speed.”

Read more at Citizen Magazine

‘Safe Schools’ Czar Recommends Child Porn For Classroom Reading

Graphic booklet sent home with Portland schoolkids shocks parents

A Report on the U.N.’s Shocking Sexuality Guidelines

School condom distribution program includes first graders, denies parental notification

U.N. Agency Calls for Teaching Children 5-to-8 Years of Age about Masturbation

“In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions of intellectual and character education fade from their minds and unhampered by tradition we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk.  The task is simple. We will organize children and teach them in an perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way.”  – Mission Statement, John D. Rockefeller’s General Education Board, 1906

The Daily Caller reports:

If Education Secretary Arne Duncan has his way, kids would be spending a lot more time at school — and a three-month summer would be a thing of the past.

Duncan joked with attendees at a luncheon at the National Press Club Tuesday in Washington that he would like schools to stay open 13 months out of the year. Then he told the audience of over 100 that he seriously supports longer school hours.

“In all seriousness, I think schools should be open 12, 13, 14 hours a day, seven days a week, 11-12 months of the year,” Duncan said. “This is not just more of the same. There would be a whole variety of after-school programs. Obviously academics would be at the heart of that. But you top it off with dancing, art, drama, music, yearbook, robotics, activities for older siblings and parents, ESL classes.”

You have to ask yourself why? And the answer is so ridiculous that once you see through the smokescreen you see that this is about control of your children. They don’t trust you to raise your children. They know better.

So why does Mr. Duncan think we need longer school days and years?

Daily Caller reports:

“As you guys know, our world has changed, our economy has changed,” said Duncan. “The days of telling kids to go home at 2:30 and having mom there with a peanut butter sandwich, those days are gone. Whether it’s a single parent working one, two, three jobs or two parents working, the hours from 3 o’clock to 7 o’clock are a huge anxiety, and that’s why we have to keep our schools open longer.”

So let me get this straight. Many parents can’t be home with children when they come home at 2:30 and that’s bad so instead of giving parents tax breaks or incentives to stay home with their children they decide to spend more taxpayer money to keep schools open 12 months a year and 12 hours a day making it harder for parents to be able to afford to stay home because they have to pay for all these programs.
The question must be asked whether parents staying home with children is a societal good. And if so shouldn’t the federal government be doing more to encourage it, rather than making it harder.

But when they say more time at school, they actually mean less time with family.  This is their end game. Remember “It Takes a Village.”  Well, the village looks an awful lot like the federal government. And a lot less like Mom with a peanut butter sandwich.

Read more at Creative Minority Report

H/T Barbara Curtis at MommyLife.net

The Shocking Origins of Public Education

Mama Grizzlies: Obama Wants More Time With Your Cubs

Stealth Education Overhaul

Threat to Parents’ Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child

Daycares Don’t Care: How Can a Daycare Love?

Hey mama grizzlies, it appears as if the White House wants more time with your cubs. Yep, I guess Barack and his socialistic cabal have had a rough go at “fundamentally transforming our nation” in dealing with the increasingly-jaundiced thinking adults who’ve lost the Obama buzz, still dig America, love God and our Constitution, and ask questions (and crap like that). So, like good brainwashers who cannot bamboozle adults, they go in for our babies.

Yep, for the sake of socialism and with an eye to “changing our traditions, our history,” as Michelle Obama said, BHO’s boy Arne Duncan is tabling a plan for parents to give “them” more time with our tots. That means “alone time,” as in big chunks of alone time with the teachers whom “they” have fed a steady diet of “America sucks and socialism is yummy” sauce.

It’s the same stack of teachers the NEA has greatly encouraged to read Saul Alinsky’s commie rag, Rules for Radicals. And you won’t have to worry about them being physically harmed while they’re away from your gaze, Mr. and Mrs. Grizz, because radical gay activist Kevin “Fistgate” Jennings will make sure your kids are okay. Especially your teenage boys.

This past week, Secretary of (Re)Education Arne Duncan said at the National Press Club that he’d like to have schools open 12 to 14 hours a day and 11 to 12 months out of the year. Dr. Evil couched his desires for huge chunks of time spent with your children in the most flowery of language, musing aloud that he wanted to have your children for an extended period to help them “compete internationally.”

Really, Arne? Correct me if I’m wrong, but we used to compete internationally … as in run the flippin’ planet … didn’t we? That is until dipsticks like you and your progressive posse decided to toss God, the Constitution, common sense, a clear delineation between right and wrong, and discipline out of school and replace it with Muslim sensitivity training classes, books about Penguins sodomizing each other, and social justice as you passed out condoms to first graders and provided secret abortions for 13-year-old girls. It’s funny that America never had a problem excelling until secular progressives, with their Marxist bent, became the pace car for the public school system.

The ambitious Obama administration, mama grizzly, is not content with trying to rule our freedom of speech (especially squelching critiques of their feckless policies), but they also want to put the joystick of our economy, our car companies, our health care, our self reliance and independence, our retirement, and now our kids into their sweaty palms because, you see, they’re wiser than we are in regard to what our kids need to know about how the world should tick—thus Duncan’s talk about more time to uh … um … “educate” your cubs.

Read more at Townhall.com

Stealth Education Overhaul

Trusting obama with our kids

Threat to Parents’ Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child

Since his Administration came into office, President Obama has quietly been reworking the country’s education system, doing an end-run around normal legislative procedure. With the U.S. Department of Education’s (DOE) funding doubled thanks to the so-called “stimulus,” the Administration has little need or incentive to bother negotiating its education agenda through Congress. Instead, the DOE is using that windfall of funding and power to stage a significant overhaul of local schools; dangling grant money before cash-strapped states on the condition they adopt key pieces of the Obama education agenda. And this is all happening without public consideration, even though it means that parents will now have to trek to Washington to petition an unaccountable bureaucracy if they want to see changes in their children’s curriculum. Knocking on the door at the DOE (the lowest rated federal department) is unlikely to produce a response.

The push for national education standards and tests began last year when the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) began writing standards for what all U.S. students should learn in school. Meanwhile, the Obama Administration has been backing the effort with federal dollars, pressing Race to the Top grants in front of fiscally starved states while making it clear that they also intend to make Title I funding (the largest federal education program at $14.5 billion) contingent upon acceptance of these standards. A number of states have signed onto the standards to position themselves for federal grants—without the American people ever having the opportunity to weigh in on such a drastic change that will soon be coming to a school near you.

Secretary Duncan’s use of the term revolution was also right on the mark. The federal government’s ever-expanding role in education, and now the Obama Administration’s push for national standards and tests, threatens the long-established right of parents to direct their children’s education and confuses a proper understanding of federalism. States model federalism for children by setting standards, tests, and curriculum. But that important lesson in self-government will be another unintended casualty of this standards overhaul now that the federal government is overreaching to set the educational terms for local schools—contrary to the spirit of the Constitution and the letter of federal law, which expressly prohibits federal involvement in standards, tests, and curriculum.

But it’s not just our deep-rooted principal of federalism that is at stake in President Obama’s education agenda; it’s also our ongoing pursuit of excellence that hangs in the balance.

Read more at the Heritage Foundation

Prolonging Education’s Race to the Bottom

Democratic Control of Schools

Ed Secretary Arne Duncan pressing for MORE SCHOOL

The Obama administration is phasing out a program that allows underprivileged children to get scholarships to expensive private schools in Washington, D.C., such as Sidwell Friends, the school the Obama girls attend, where tuition runs about $31,000 a  year.
 
Nevertheless, Obama on Thursday spoke about his “obligation to lift up every child” to help them achieve a quality education.
 
In addressing the National Urban League’s 100th Anniversary Convention, Obama touted his education reform initiative called “Race to the Top.” The $4.35 billion education initiative encourages states to reform their education laws and policies by making them compete for additional federal grant dollars.

Obama said it has been a success. But the National Urban League and even a major teachers’ union have criticized “Race to the Top” for leaving minority students behind.

Read more at CNS News

Empowering education

Education: Too Important for a Government Monopoly

Education Secretary Rejects D.C. Voucher Program As Parents Press Congress to Continue It

The assault on children’s innocence and parental rights heats up.

Students in Provincetown — from elementary school to high school — will be able to get free condoms at school under a recently approved policy that takes effect this fall. The rule also requires school officials to keep student requests secret, and ignore parents’ objections.

“The intent is to protect kids,’’ said School Superintendent Beth Singer, who wrote the policy that the Cape Cod town’s School Committee unanimously passed two weeks ago. “We know that sexual experimentation is not limited to an age, so how does one put an age on it?’’

“It’s about availability,’’ said committee chairman Peter Grosso. “We’re not handing ’em out like M&M’s.’’

The policy, which requires school nurses to supply condoms to any student who asks, drew criticism yesterday from some parents, a family-advocacy group, and even the town manager, who expressed alarm that children would be able to acquire condoms beginning next school year.

Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, blasted the policy as an “absolute push to promote sexual promiscuity.’’

“This is the theater of the absurd to hand condoms to first-graders who don’t even know what their purpose possibly could be, who can’t even spell sex,’’ he said. “And it’s a gross violation of parents’ rights.’’

Town Manager Sharon Lynn said she would prefer a system that requires parental consent until children reach a certain age.

“I think the parents should be responsible for [their children], and know what their children are doing,’’ Lynn said in an interview.

Read more at the Boston Globe

Threat to Parents’ Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child

‘Safe Schools’ Czar Recommends Child Porn For Classroom Reading

A Report on the U.N.’s Shocking Sexuality Guidelines

U.N. Agency Calls for Teaching Children 5-to-8 Years of Age about Masturbation

Girl Scouts team up with Planned Parenthood, distribute sex literature to 10-year-olds

In less than 145 days, citizens of the United States will again hand the sword of police powers to fellow citizens for the purpose of wielding governing authority. As with every election from local water-management-district positions to the president of the United States, this is a test of the collective values of “We the People.”

Let me first assert that our last test (2008) scored a resounding “F.” Have we done our homework, learned where we went wrong, and are we ready for the retake? As it has been since the dawn of civil freedom, that duty rests greatest on those who know and revere the Author of our freedom.

In this country in particular, it has long been recognized by credible historians that the clergy served as the primary source of moral truth as well as religious and civil education in our founding era. The First Great Awakening served to both light and fuel the fires of liberty.

Pastor and 19th-century historian John Wingate Thornton asserted, “To the pulpit, the Puritan Pulpit, we owe the moral force which won our independence.” How is that?

Professor Ellis Sandoz, in his extensive studies that led to his book, “Political Sermons of the Founding Era,” declared:

The political culture of this country was not only all the things it is most frequently said to be … but was deeply rooted in the core religious consciousness articulated above all by the preachers; theirs were pulpits of a new nation with a privileged, providential role in world history.Contrast that with the current direction of most pulpits in regards to civil government:

“I can’t be too political because I have both Democrats and Republicans in my church.”

“We should focus on evangelism and not get caught up in politics.”

“Politics is dirty.”

“Political involvement is a distraction and undermines my ability to preach the Gospel.”"Politics is not the business of the church.”

“I can’t tell my people who to vote for.”

Red herrings and straw men! Indefensible both biblically and constitutionally!

I have listed just the most commonly heard excuses used by pastors to ignore the condition of the governing authorities and stay safely in their stained-glass bunkers while the battle rages around them.

While I thank God for the patriot pastors like those who have signed our Pastors’ Declaration of Godly Citizenship and those like Wayne Williams, pastor of Liberty Baptist Tabernacle in Rapid City, S.D. (“Pastor tests IRS by endorsing candidate”), and hundreds of others joining Alliance Defense Fund’s Free The Church project – they are still a minority.

The collapse of sound theology in regards to the role Christians play in general and that the pulpits serve in particular as anchors to “the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” is still a primary root cause of the disconnect between Christians and our suffrage.

Read more at World Net Daily

Join the fight to take back our nation!

Bonhoeffer: A true believer

“Do we really need school? I don’t mean education, just forced schooling: six classes a day, five days a week, nine months a year, for twelve years. Is this deadly routine really necessary? And if so, for what? Don’t hide behind reading, writing, and arithmetic as a rationale, because 2 million happy homeschoolers have surely put that banal justification to rest.”  -  John Taylor Gatto

The high school redesign exercise in Portland serves as a reminder of why top-down solutions are often doomed to fail. How could anyone except those at the top propose closing a popular and successful school like Benson Polytechnic? And how could anyone force families back inside the stifling brick walls of an unpopular and unsuccessful high school like Jefferson?

Fortunately, two individuals have recently come forward with surprisingly out-of-the-box statements that could open the door to some truly constructive solutions, at least for the students.The Oregonian’s David Sarasohn penned a column earlier this month that cut through the obfuscation and identified the key element of the redesign plan: force. He rightly explained that those in charge of the Portland school system are attempting to fix the problems of a school like Jefferson simply by forcing those who live near it to send their kids into this perennially failing school. The plan would allow few transfers for desperate parents seeking a better education for their children.

Sarasohn then states what he apparently sees as powerful truth:

“This is, after all, America, and you can’t force families to send their children to any school.”

Of course, parents with means can’t be forced, because they can afford private education or they can pick up and move close to a better public school. But you can force kids without means into the failing brick buildings near their homes. You shouldn’t, but you can.

Dr. Husk said the current ESD system is based on “forced participation.” She used this analogy to make her point:

“Imagine walking into a grocery store where you would prefer not to shop because they don’t really sell what you want. But when you enter the store you find that your food budget has already been given directly to the store. So you put certain things in your cart, whether you want them or not. You don’t find out what they’re going to cost until you’re almost at the checkout line or all the way through. When you go through the checkout line they keep 10% of the food budget right off of the top. And the rest of the food budget comes to you in change provided that you can prove that you’re going to spend it wisely.

“Forced participation in the ESD puts the onus on the school district to prove that they can provide services. We believe that the onus should be on the ESD to prove that they provide good services at reasonable costs….

“Rather than forced participation, I believe we should be able to opt in or out….”

She clearly wants choice of service providers for her district, but what about choice of education providers for the kids?

Read more at the Oregon Catalyst

What If Government Controlled The Grocery Store Industry?