To Homeschool or Not to Homeschool


In my last post, I mentioned that I am pregnant. I’m a little over halfway through, and I’m definitely looking forward to being done with it. I was diagnosed with severe morning sickness at 4 weeks and spent about two months throwing up constantly. I’m still fighting the morning sickness, but it is now far more manageable. At this point I’m assuming I’ll have to deal with it until I give birth, which is not something I’m looking forward to, but there’s really nothing for it. Otherwise, everything is progressing as it should. But that’s all beside the point.

I also mentioned going into Education in my last post. I want to teach Elementary kids. But school was not a good experience for Withteeth or myself. He had (and still has) undiagnosed dysgraphia and dysthymia. I had undiagnosed (now diagnosed) ADHD, autism, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Had we been diagnosed, life probably would have been easier for us. But we weren’t. All of those disorders have genetic components, which mean our children could have on or multiple of them. To be honest, w aren’t so worried about the disorders themselves. We are happy with our lives. We know how to cop, and we can teach our kids to do the same. The problem is lack of understanding and ability to deal with these issues in general society, especially in Education. I want to help children who struggled like I did. I want to make their lives easier. But I don’t know how many of the teachers I’ll work with will have the sames goals or understanding. In short, I don’t know how willing I’ll be to trust them with my kids. For that reason, Withteeth and I have been considering Homeschooling.

Very few secular people accept Homeschooling as a legitimate form of education, but Withteeth and I both believe that the public school system needs to be reformed. We also don’t know if we’ll b able to afford a decent private school education. That leaves Homeschooling. We are both educated, and we have a number of friends in different fields to our own. As such, we have little fear that our child won’t learn something because we aren’t trained in that field. Not that the average public school teacher is an expert in every subject they teach. Since the main argument against Homeschooling is that parents aren’t qualified, it seems as though most people should should feel satisfied with that, but Homeschooling makes people uncomfortable. I can understand the discomfort, but I don’t agree with it. I believe that children should b educated in whichever way works best for them, and that way might be through Homeschooling. However, I think that Homeschooling should be regulated. I don’t think just anyone should be allowed to Homeschool, and I don’t think parents should be allowed to have free reign. Children need to be protected, and sometimes it’s their parents they need to be protected from.

What are your thoughts? Would you Homeschool? Should Homeschooling be allowed? If so, should it be regulated and how should it be regulated?

Advertisements

56 responses to “To Homeschool or Not to Homeschool

  • To HomeSchool or Not to HomeSchool | The MorningStar Academy

    […] via To Homeschool or Not to Homeschool — hessianwithteeth […]

    Like

  • JC Haley

    I was diagnosed as dyslexic in my 20s and in my 30s I was diagnosed as a “successful autisic” (makes me feel like I should get a Scooby snack and a pat on the head). My daughter who is now a 4.0 Sophomore in college is dyslexic and my son is autistic.

    I’ve homeschooled both; however, my daughter spent some time in elementary public school (during my divorce) and she and my son both spent some time in private schools (my attempt to get them a better education while I was a single mom). The only place they flourished was homeschool.

    My daughter is very outgoing and socializes well but the schools kept putting her in bottom tier classes because she didn’t perform well on their standardized tests. However, she always had straight A’s in class.

    My son is a high functioning autistic and is extremely smart but because he is so quiet and doesn’t process language smoothly (one of my struggles also) the teachers never knew how to teach him. One of the private schools told me he couldn’t return because he wasn’t thriving. WTF? Pardon me, but I get passionate about learning challenges. I don’t see them as disabilities, I just feel that I and others like me are running on different operating systems than the rest of the world. (big computer geek here)

    I wish I could have been homeschooled when I was young but that was the 70s and 80s and it was definitely the third rail back then. I probably could’ve finished college in 4 years instead of 6.

    You should do what feels right to you and don’t let all of the noise get to you. You will be able to feel it when you are on the right path. Good luck with the rest of your pregnancy! I’m sure you will be happy when the sickness is gone. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  • inexperiencedhomeschoolingmom

    I haven’t read the comments, but just wanted to add my two sense. Parents are the children’s first teachers, and we have right to teach our children the way that we see fit. We do not need any more regulations than what is already out there. Nobody should be allowed to tell a parent they are not allowed to educate their own children. That is a parent’s God given right. My husband and I refuse to use the public school system because I don’t like Common Core, and I do not like what is going on in the schools. We too, could not afford private schools, so that only left homeschooling, and we haven’t looked back. It has been the best decision that we have made for our family. Just FYI, I am hearing that colleges are accepting more homeschool kids than regular school kids. I can’t stat my source, I would have to look it up again.

    Like

    • hessianwithteeth

      What about when states have no regulations? What about the parents who pull their children out of public school to abuse them? Don’t the children have the right to be protected?

      Like

      • inexperiencedhomeschoolingmom

        I have never heard of anyone who homeschools their children and abuses them. Does it happen? Maybe. But you don’t punish all parents because of one person, you punish that person who hurt the children. Government intrusion has never solved anything.

        Like

        • hessianwithteeth

          “Government intrusion has never solved anything.” I think you should think hard and know a bit more about history before you make a claim like that. Goverment has done some very good thing by stepping in and also bad. With out regular government intrusion an economy would rapidly turn into a string of monopolies. Producers would create unsafe products which consumers might not be able to recognize until the damage has already been done. Now I’m certainly not pro public everything but policies need to be take on a case by case basis there is not rule of thumb that will get you the answers you need from social policies.

          -Withteeth

          Like

          • inexperiencedhomeschoolingmom

            What you are talking about is given the government more rights than the parents. For example Hitler made it illegal to homeschool back in the 30s, why? Because the government can’t indoctrinate the children if they are taught by the parents. That law is still on the books today and parents have been thrown in jail and had their children taken away from them all because they are being educated at home. Less government in our lives is better than having a nanny state. Yes government has done good, but if you let the government in everything, we lose our rights.

            Like

          • hessianwithteeth

            The possibility that the government might over-regulate doesn’t seem comparable to the actuality that some parents use homeschooling to hide abuse.

            Like

          • hessianwithteeth

            Okay, but we currently don’t have fascist in power (although for the US Trump is trying) though again, it’s not a slippy slope argument that work, it isn’t some binary choice. Big brother or no government. You think that the a government should not be able to jail a parent for wanting to home school there child, cool I’m fine with that, but then why are you crying nanny state? Point to the specific kinds of government intervention that you disagree with. Are you against the state intervening when parents fail to provide the basics of care as well because you’re argument right now would stretch to include that sort of intervention as well?

            I press you not because I necessarily think that you are wrong. I press you barbecue I think the argument you are presenting is weak and leads to over generalization and thereby an inability to act as it fails to define the real problem.

            -Withteeth

            Like

          • equippedcat

            Trump is a fascist? A loudmouth, sure. Speaks without thinking, of course. Full of himself, certainly. Impractical, mostly. But what fascist tendencies has he exposed?

            Like

          • hessianwithteeth

            He regularly alludes to his followers to do violence to other candiates for one. He is popular in no small part because he opening speak of racist a bigoted rhetoric, othering whole groups of people and not to long ago we was calling for the US to take up Toruture including water boarding and then suggested wrose action ought to be taken as well. Not to mention him saying that the USA ought kill the families of terrorists as well. Being an thoughtless and a load mouth does not preclude you from forwarding facist ideology. He really cuts as a modern Mussolini. Charming, populist, and pro-military corporations and violence against those he disagrees with or is othering. Man-child or not. This is a man with a real chance of getting into the power seat of America we no longer have the luxury of not taking him seriously.

            -Withteeth

            Like

          • equippedcat

            Violence to other candidates? I recall remarks about violence against violent protestors, but did not see ones against other candidates. But then, politics turns my stomach so I tend not to follow it closely.

            Racist, I’m not so sure. Yes, he tends to make blanket statements against some groups of which some members are a problem, which is at the very least careless.

            He is not a politician, which is why so many seem to like him. I think he would be a problem as president at the very least because of his tendency to get into spats with people for trivial things, annoying here, potentially much worse on the national stage.

            The problem is, the other choice gives every indication of being worse.

            Like

          • hessianwithteeth

            Well if that what you think, but Hilary is very much the lesser of two evil here, as least with her you know what your going to get, more of the same. With trump he’ll likely hand off his job to some one else and who knows who that’ll be. Could be more of the same, it could be flagrant and unabashed corporatism and open corruption. It could be warmongering lie what we saw with Dick Cheney. Not to forget we will not get the work on women right.

            You do not want a idiot being puppeteered on the seat of power, and you don’t was an idiot taking the reins of the most powerful nation in the world. A Man who regularly compliments Putin and Kim Jong-il as “strong leaders.” I kid you not. Though It doesn’t surprise me you don’t know any of that if your happy to suggest Trump is a better candidate then Clinton. At the very least Clinton will be able to handle the power that someone with the nuclear football need to be able to handle. Not to mention he constantly and constantly lies. Out right lies. Trump will strait up make shit up out of thin air. At least Clinton does the courtesy of speaking in half truths and just not saying thing which are flatly false. Do you really was a president who has so little moral fiber that he will flatly lie about anything and everything? And can you imagine the kind of damage he will do with foreign policy given his first brilliant idea was to build a wall and get the Mexicans to pay for it? It baffles the mind!

            -Withteeth

            Like

          • equippedcat

            You make good points about Trump’s weaknesses. Hillary seems to have more than her share as well. There is a claim she said she would “shoot Russian planes out of the air in Syria”. Is that fabricated or completely out of context? If not, it is rather worrisome. There is the use of a private email server, which is at best incredible incautious with national security, for which others doing the same thing have been severely punished, but she was not. Maybe it is not her fault it was applied to her, but for her to accept the benefits of such a double standard is distressing. There are the out and out lies about Bengazi, although it is not clear whether she knew they were lies or were fed them by the PTB. There is no evidence whatsoever that she was involved, but an astounding number of people who were of risk to her are now dead. No fire, but lots and lots of smoke, some of it likely generated by those who are against her, but all of it being false or misleading is hard to accept.

            Then there are her stated policies. They do sound good and may well be well meaning. I fear many are impractical, that is having a high cost and low return. Giving amnesty and citizenship to illegal aliens is insanity, concentrating on “gun” violence and ignoring all other violence, claiming that “quality affordable healthcare for everyone” is possible, free college, etc. shows that no matter how well meaning she may be, she will cause further damage to us.

            How I wish there was a viable alternative to the two of them.

            Like

          • hessianwithteeth

            Well you know that I thoughly disagree with the notion that the richest country in the world can afford to give its citzens a free education and at the lvery least basic emergency medical care, as does basically every other developed country for a fraction of the price American pay for the current highly broken privatized system. The idea that you can not have free health care, or again at least free emergency health care is without question a lie regularly propped up be those making a metric ton of money of people desperation. And it is also the case that Education is not free could easily be heavily subsidized to be affordable for basically anyone such as it is in Canada.

            But That’s off topic, I am not even remotely a fan of Clinton, and I’m not going to bother defending her. When the dust clears and documents come out in 20 years outline a lot of what really happened we will probably see her for what she really is. A corrupt and typically two faced political who had to skin to all kinds of lows to over come sexism, and unfair hate, but in the process great all kinds of justified loathing.

            Trump though is a monster, he scare historian because of his rhetoric matching many every fascists and his ties to Russia. People to a man like him or little more then wallets to be stripped bare to enrich himself, and while some might call that honesty I call that unaccountably. And if you can’t hold a powerful man accountable then you have yourself a tyrant.

            But I too wish it was not the case that the USA was picking between the less of two evil, particularly when either could be remotely called benign. Though it does drive home how important local election have become.

            Like

          • equippedcat

            Richest country in the world? That’s a disturbing thought, since we are essentially “bankrupt”. Then there is the concept that it is the business of government to provide “goodies” to people. An efficient government should only be involved in that which the people can not or should not provide for themselves. A reasonable government would add helping people who help themselves to the degree possible for them. A corrupt, bloated, doomed government buys power by making people dependent on it.

            If you give someone something “for free”, the tendency is for them not to appreciate it, or at least not for long. And worse, for them to then consider that “their due”. A regular diet of this pretty well demolishes any degree of self sufficiency, turning people into perpetual “children” clinging to mommy government’s apron strings.

            I would not be opposed to the government helping out with advanced education. Applicants should have to a) show they were willing and able to succeed in college (per basic school performance or by a period of national service), b) be limited to fields of study which have benefit to the country (areas needed and in short supply) and c) be obligated to a period of service in their field after completion of education.

            As for the previous medical system being “broken”, if you are talking about costs, yes. I think the quality at least used to be superior. Did not the wealthy of the world used to come here for advanced services rather than wait for or rely on the “free” services available to them locally?

            But as you say, on topic, we are in trouble no matter which way the election goes.

            Like

          • inexperiencedhomeschoolingmom

            No I’m not going to continue the argument, because your original question was government regulations in homeschooling. I have answered that, whether you like my answers or not.

            Like

          • hessianwithteeth

            Indeed I found them rather lacking, and I had hope you could better distill your argument into a form more convincing as that would help you regardless if I agreed or not. But that is fine have a lovely day.

            -Withteeth

            Like

  • clubschadenfreude

    don’t homeschool. I would have loved to have been homeschooled and would have been badly prepared for reality where things don’t always go your way and mom and dad aren’t always there for you. Teach the kids to think long before they get to school, fill in the gaps you see and let them know its a game that has to be played like every other interaction with humans. Schooling is imprinting information on children and in every case it is outside forces, from parents who want little mini-mes to civilizations that want coherent citizens, to governments who want usable citizens,etc.

    Like

    • equippedcat

      Based on your posts, one wonders how “prepared for reality” you are 🙂

      Providing information is good. Providing viewpoints can be useful. Issuing orders should usually be avoided.

      Like

    • hessianwithteeth

      But schools don’t prepare children for the reality of today’s society. It doesn’t prepare them for university, in fact, I spent more time unlearning what I as taught in highschool during my first year on University (and I went to one of the best highschools in my city). It also doesn’t prepare them for work life. In fact, public schools were created to prepare students for life as factory workers, and it hasn’t evolved with changing times. There are far better ways to prepare a child for “the real world” than sending them to public school.

      Like

      • clubschadenfreude

        well, let me ask you what you had to “unlearn”? And I am curious, what in public schooling prepares children for being factory workers and how would you change it?

        if there are far better ways for preparing a child for the real world, I am very interested in what they are. Would you explain?

        Like

  • Dirck

    When the prospect of a child entered out lives, my wife and I were seriously considering homeschooling as well, for similar if less thoroughly diagnosed reasons as you are. We’re also in Canada, and the requirements seem about the same, so it was possible… but a lot of the available supports seem to be aimed at people who keep their kids out of school for reasons of religious extremity. That creates something of an assumption running the other way– if you are homeschooling, you must be part of some peculiar cult. Things may be different there, but be aware of possible assumptions.

    What turned us from it in the end was an autism diagnosis between son’s second and third birthdays. That added substantially to the potential work-load, and a lot of the supports for him were more easily accessed through the local school board (we lucked into living three blocks from a school particularly arranged to accommodate autism, too). The reason I mention this: it is well to stay flexible. We might have clung to the idea of homeschooling, focusing on the potential for crappy other-kids to give son grief, which is of course happening, at a cost of daily interaction with professionals under whom he is thriving. On the other hand, he might have been further along the spectrum, and school wouldn’t have been in the cards at all.

    There is also this to consider– after about five years of having the kid RIGHT THERE constantly, the idea of a few kid-free hours for several days each week starts to look pretty good.

    Like

    • hessianwithteeth

      If it were just for a few hours, I would probably be happier to consider sending them to school. I could end up changing my mind, but I’m the type of person who doesn’t want that time away from certain people. It’s something I’ve noticed with Withteeth. I’m also a bit weary of a lot of the therapies for autistic children. Much of it is aimed at making the child more “normal” rather than helping the child feel comfortable in society. I would really need to know what types of therapies the school uses and what theories the teachers hold to before I’d be willing to put my child in that school. But then, I don’t know if baby will have autism yet, so I’m not going to worry too much about that yet.
      I do agree that we need to be open to changing our ideas. Nothing is set in stone yet. But homeschooling is definitely something we have become enamoured with.

      Like

    • equippedcat

      Religious “extreme”? I would guess that a majority of religious people who homeschool do so because public school is so antagonistic toward their beliefs, so considering them extreme seems a bit much. Unless of course, (and it seems to be heading that way), anybody who believes in God is to be considered “extreme”.

      And that is a problem. People who think they should cut off your head for not believing the same way they do, they are extreme. People who think that abortion doctors should be killed or clinics blown up, they are extreme. A religious person who just wants to be left alone, or even wants to share the blessing they have found, is not extreme. And a case could be made that a person who wants to identify them as extreme, is actually more extreme.

      Like

      • clubschadenfreude

        “so because public school is so antagonistic toward their beliefs, so considering them extreme seems a bit much.”

        well, consider your reaction, EC. You claim that public schools are “so antagonistic toward” your beliefs. Can you give examples of what this “antagonism” consists of? And indeed what “beliefs” by Christians are being attacked? What if someone doesn’t want anything to do with your “blessing” when it is nothing more than baseless claims insisting that everyone but you is wrong? You may not see it as extreme, but it is certainly unwanted. It’s also amusing to see you want to insist that anyone who doesn’t want to hear your nonsense is “really” the extremist.

        Like

        • equippedcat

          It may be nonsense, and for that reason, I don’t insist you listen
          to it. It should be meaningless noise to you; I find it interesting that rather than just ignore it, you feel the need to search it out and then whine about it. I’m willing to allow the “extreme” label be applied to you…

          Antagonistic? Well let’s see. We can’t say the pledge of allegiance because it *shudder* has the word “God” in it. We can’t have Christmas pageants because it has the word “Christ” in it and some people claim it is His birthday even though it’s not really. Better not get caught praying before a test and certainly no group prayer or worship is allowed. Don’t turn in any work which says anything positive about God or it’ll get a failing grade. In at least one school, you had to attest to the pillars of Islam in order to pass (hopefully not any more since they’ve been caught doing that). Any Christian after school club has to jump through hoops no other activity does, if they are allowed at all. Teaching kids as young as kindergarten about sex, even abnormal sex. Browbeating the students that have faith that it is silly, without real proof it is silly, and without real proof of any contrasting viewpoint.

          Like

          • clubschadenfreude

            The problem is your “meaningless noise” is not so meaningless or innocent as you would want to claim it to be. Your fellow theists are constantly trying to force their beliefs on everyone else. You may find it interesting that I would seek out these instances of theists doing their best in forcing their particular versions of their religions on others. I find it necessary to always stand against such things; the desire of many theists for a theocracy must always be pointed out and stood against or that theocracy will come to pass and well, history tells us what happens when people are forced to believe in things against their will or, if they do not believe, are considered less than human and are persecuted. And this is real persecution, not some Christian fantasy that if they can’t force their beliefs on someone it means that they are persecuted.

            what school cannot say the Pledge of Allegiance? And hmmm, I wonder, do you know that the pledge never had religious nonsense in it when it was written? Nope, you can’t force people to participate in Christmas pagents in public schools, but you can have as many at your church as you’d like. You can’t force Muslim kids or Jewish kids or Hindu kids or atheist kids to celebrate your religion.

            People can pray in schools all they want, so your claims about praying before tests are just the usual strawman claims that a Christian makes when they have nothing else. They are false claims repeatedly made despite the fact you know better, which makes them lies. What people can’t do is force someone else to pray like they do and require prayer to participate. I’s also such a sad false claim that Christian groups have to jump through hoops when that is not the case at all and it is the case that groups that some Christians abhor, like LGBT groups, do actually have to go through those hoops in order to exist.

            Sex education is another lovely example of how Christians do want to force their various different opinions about sex and how “bad” it is onto other people. The biology should be taught because this is a great way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions. It also teaches children when to report adults who want to abuse them and what abuse is.

            And “browbeating” children into it’s silly to have faith? Where has that happened, EC, or are you getting confused with the false claims from such lovely movies like “God is not dead yet”, quite a urban legend that Christians have made up in order to play pretend they are persecuted in a country that has thousands of Christian radio stations, tv stations, churches on every corner, etc.

            Yep, it is silly to believe without evidence. You don’t believe in Thor because it is silly to believe without evidence. Now there are people who do believe and how dare you not present their constrasting view point in your church, EC if it is so bad to eliminate claims when they don’t have evidence to support them. I do expect you to insist that your church invites believers to speak about why their religion is the only true one. But I will guess that you’d never do that because it would show that your claims are as empty as theirs.

            It does please me that you are reduced to such blatant false claims, EC. Your actions show that you ignore your own religion when it says that lies/liars are hated by your god, and it shows you have nothing else.

            Like

          • equippedcat

            There are SOME theists who try to force their beliefs on everyone else. Not all. Not me. Perhaps some discrimination on who you go after in your attempts to save the world from theists would be in order.

            Note that there are also some ATHEISTS who try to force their beliefs on everyone else. Might not you be in that category?

            Here is a question for you. You asked me a question, I answered, you called me a liar. What do you think the odds I’ll answer any more of your questions is likely to be?

            Here is another question for you. What are the odds that someone who advertises that they belong to a group which takes “satisfaction or pleasure felt at someone else’s misfortune” will be taken seriously by most people?

            Like

          • clubschadenfreude

            Yes, you are right that *some* theists try to force their religion on everyone else. You are one of them since you make up nonsense that isn’t true to excuse the action of forcing religion on others and to try to claim that Christians are persecuted in the US. Let’s take a look at what you’ve said when you found it necessary to intentionally make false claims about how Christianity is treated “antagonistically”: “We can’t say the pledge of allegiance because it *shudder* has the word “God” in it. We can’t have Christmas pageants because it has the word “Christ” in it and some people claim it is His birthday even though it’s not really. Better not get caught praying before a test and certainly no group prayer or worship is allowed. Don’t turn in any work which says anything positive about God or it’ll get a failing grade. In at least one school, you had to attest to the pillars of Islam in order to pass (hopefully not any more since they’ve been caught doing that). Any Christian after school club has to jump through hoops no other activity does, if they are allowed at all. Teaching kids as young as kindergarten about sex, even abnormal sex. Browbeating the students that have faith that it is silly, without real proof it is silly, and without real proof of any contrasting viewpoint.”

            I asked for evidence of your claims and surprise, you’ve presented nothing. Now, please do show where atheists try to force their beliefs on others. Now to do this, you need to show what beliefs an atheist has that involve atheism and how they try to “force” them on others. I do happily acknowledge that I do believe that no one has the right to force someone else to pray, to worship a certain god, etc, and I will happily stand against them when they try to do this. However, theists have all the right to pray and worship as they wish as long as they don’t interfere with anyone else’s existence e.g. you can have a nativity scene on church property or your own property; you cannot on public property. You can wail and scream all you like that everyone is going to hell in your church or home. You can refuse medical attention if you think your god is going to heal you, but you can’t force that on someone who can’t make that informed decision. If you wish to complain about being restricted in your attempts to force your religion on others as a “right” of your religion, then we again have a theist who *does* want to force his religion on others and your protestations of innocence fail.

            Yes, I called you a liar when you made the quoted claims above since those claims aren’t true. I have no problems pointing out when a Christian choose to make false claims. Now, you can apologize for trying to lie to me, or you can show evidence for your claims as I have asked. Your attempts to make a threat out of not answering my posts isn’t very effective. I do not care if a liar chooses not to answer any more of my questions. The odds aren’t very good that the answers will be true, eh?

            Hmm, I belong to a group “satisfaction or pleasure felt at someone else’s misfortune”? What group is that, EC? I personally do take a great deal satisfaction when someone like you suffers misfortune by your own acts, like the attempt to make false claims. I also cheer when the Empire fails in a Star Wars movie or when a criminal gets caught by law enforcement. There are times for feeling schadenfreude and for not, and so many silly theists try to pretend that I always feel it for everyone since you have nothing to support your claims or your attempts at personal attacks. You harvest the result of trying to lie to me, EC, by you demonstrating that a Christianity does nothing to make a person more moral. I have no problem in feeling pleasure over seeing that demonstrated at all.

            Like

          • equippedcat

            It is possible that I am incorrect on occasion, but I don’t intentionally fabricate stuff or put forward stuff I know or even have significant reason to suspect is not so. I also try very hard not to be nasty to anyone, because I don’t get any joy from it, and it does not seem to have any positive results and frankly, it just “seems wrong”. It would seem that some or all of these are not the case for you. That’s your cross to bear, not mine. Thank God. Literally.

            What group do you belong to? It’s in your name. Club (of those to whom) Schadenfreude (is admired and sought after). I understand taking delight in the misfortune of others, but I can’t work up the feeling myself. Sure, I’m happy when a miscreant receives justice, but that is not “misfortune” (although he may certainly consider it thus). That is deserved. And hopefully provides him disincentive to repeat the transgression and thus ultimately is actually fortune.

            It appears that you are giddy over my “misfortune”. I’m not sure what that misfortune is, unless it is having to wade through your diatribes, which seem deliberately uber nasty. Kind of seems like you are using those who disagree with you almost as a form of masturbation. Sorry to harsh your buzz, but I don’t find your ravings that disturbing. When it gets to the point that you even start to bug me, I just ignore you.

            Like

          • clubschadenfreude

            Again, it seems you have no evidence for your claims, EC. This is not just you being occasionally incorrect, it is you repeating false claims without checking them out and you have been called on these false claims before, EC. You depend on willful ignorance to keep spreading such nonsense because you don’t want to not believe that you are some poor martyr for the cause and that Christians are persecuted in the US. You want to pretend that Christians don’t lie so you can insist that you don’t have a “significant reason” to doubt what they say. It isn’t just “possible” your claims were false, they *are* false. This has been pointed out to you and yet you still refuse to acknowledge that you are wrong, clinging to false claims to support your belief. Check out snopes.com for the nonsense about students having to “attest”(affirm to be true or genuine) to the pillars of Islam. Just check out your local school to hear the pledge being said (and hey, some Christians find it completely unchristian to say the pledge and refuse to say it, with or without the late added bit about God done by fearful Christians when they though saying god would make a Commie evidently burst into flame). There are plenty of Christian groups in schools and no, they don’t have to go through special hoops; that’s what religious groups of other faiths and LGBT groups have to do since many Christians consistently resist such groups. The Equal Access Act was created to allow student groups to form, and Christians have done their best to not acknowledge it in regards to groups that they don’t like.

            Nice attempt to try to claim that I am *nasty* to you for pointing out your false claims. If you want to claim showing that your claims are false is “nasty”, so be it. Unfortunately for you, the truth is the truth, no matter how unpleasant you may find it. All you are doing is trying to make an emotional excuse on why no one should show you that you are wrong and that lying is not a nice thing to do. I know it’s hard to admit that Christians can and will lie. It was hard for me to acknowledge this and when I did, then there wasn’t much reason to believe in Christianity. I kept on doing so, praying for help in keeping my faith. Unsurprisingly, when nothing came, then I realized that Christianity and its god were no more true than Ahura-Mazda, Zeus, Thor, Coyote, Tezcatlipoca, etc.

            Wow, you think that the title of my blog means it is a real club? Oh my. No, EC, it’s just a title that I picked out because I like the 30s concept of dinner clubs, the Art Deco style, and it helps me give a little structure to my blog by using the theme to organize my posts. There is no club. I don’t believe for a moment that you do not take pleasure in the misfortune of others, and you admit that you do indeed become happy when a miscreant receives justice, something that is a misfortune to him (your opinion doesn’t matter in this determination). You want to claim that your feelings are somehow better than mine because you insist that the misfortune is “deserved”. Sorry, EC, that’s schadenfreude, and your unconsidered claims about me regarding it now show you to be a hypocrite. Nice attempt there to redefine words too. That is a very common tactic from theists, trying to excuse themselves by insisting that one word “really and for true” means something entirely different.

            I’m giddy? Nope, just enjoying watching you support my position with evidence by your actions. Your actions show that the claims of Christianity are false, that Christians are no better in anyway than anyone else, and that they will ignore the commands of their bible when convenient, showing that they have no more belief in it as a source of moral objectivity than anyone else. This is the misfortune you have created for yourself and your claims. My posts aren’t “uber nasty”, they dare to show you that your claims are false and that you intentionally repeat them to try to gain an advantage, making them lies. I know no one likes to be called a liar. You don’t and to try to avoid the evidence, you try to make personal attacks on myself.

            Now, since you have made the claim that I somehow use those I disagree with as a form of masturbation, please do explain what you mean by that. Or is this yet one more baseless attack using what you hope are offensive words in order to try to poison the well, EC?

            You aren’t harshing anyone’s buzz; you are just a Christian who makes claims and cannot support them. This is nothing new. Ignore away, EC. That doesn’t make your claims any more true.

            Like

          • equippedcat

            I can only presume that someone claiming to be Christian hurt you very badly. For that, I am sorry. And even if you don’t believe in God, I do, and I pray that He blesses you, gives you peace, calms your hurts and even magnifies the love in your life.

            You have strongly held opinions and that is your right. They conflict with mine and since you prefer to play with words rather than ideas and I can be clumsy with words, there appears to be no common ground for us. The best we can hope for is to agree to disagree.

            Like

          • clubschadenfreude

            Your presumption is wrong and I am fairly sure you’ve made it before and were told the same thing. You have invented this presumption that I was somehow hurt by someone you can claim wasn’t a TrueChristian so you can ignore what I’ve written. Your apology is unnecessary and a little silly since the reason I am an atheist is that there is no evidence for the claims of Christianity and Christians. It’s always great fun to watch a Christian insist that someone else “really” isn’t one, and again have not one scrap of evidence to support his claims. And we still don’t have any evidence for your claims made so far, EC. Why is that, EC?

            Lots of Christians have claimed that they were going to pray for me. And their prayers have done not one single thing. Since I already am happy and loved, seems like your god has nothing to do. I hate to break it to you but people don’t need your god or your prayers to enjoy life. People who aren’t Christians are just as happy as you, if not happier.

            Your prayers do nothing EC, but if you want to make believe that they do, at least pray for someone who needs help gets it from your god. How about prayers that help the hungry? Those that are dying from some horrible disease? An amputee to get his or her limb back so they don’t have to suffer the pain of phantom limbs and stump sores? And when those prayers don’t do anything, you might want to think about your religion.

            EC, you have made claims that are not true. They are materially false, not just an opinion we may differ on. People can indeed pray in school. People can indeed say the pledge, etc. You said they cannot and that is not true. It’s amusing that you are doing your best to pretend you made no false claims but again that doesn’t work very well in a written medium that is recorded. I am not the one who tries to redefine words like schadenfreude and misfortune. You are not “clumsy”, you are trying to make more false claims in your attempts to redefine those words and the ideas behind them.

            No, the best we can hope for is not to agree to disagree. The best we can expect is that you support your claims of factuality with evidence. If you refuse, and I can provide evidence to the contrary, what we have is the truth and the fact that you tried to misrepresent it. Reality disagrees with you, EC.

            Like

          • equippedcat

            I’m sorry that I misunderstood your situation; it was the only thing which I could think of which made sense to me based on your discussion style.

            My prayers may not do you any good, but they sure can’t do you any harm, and maybe, unbeknownst to either of us, they might do you some good. So it is worth me praying them..

            Like

          • clubschadenfreude

            EC, I have no reason to believe you “misunderstood” anything. You wanted to hope I was miserable. Again, you seem to depend on willful ignorance when you interact with people. If a tedious old theist lie was the “only thing” you could think of for why I am an atheist and why I have no problem in pointing out your lies and baseless claims, then you need to actually interact with atheists and read what they write. As it stands, all you seem to read is what other Christians claim about atheists and it is wrong, all based on a need to imagine that anyone who isn’t a Christian is miserable.

            Your prayers do nothing, and some people’s prayers do indeed do harm. What of all of the ignorant theists, including Christians, who pray that their child will get well and that child dies because they did not get medical help? What of all of the prayers for those who are dying? Those who are starving? Those who are running in terror because someone is chasing them with a machete? Funny how there is no evidence that prayers do anything at all and that they do cause harm. All you have is wishes, EC, the same thing that any other theist has when they make a false claim that their prayers work. You don’t believe them for the same reasons I don’t believe you.

            Like

          • clubschadenfreude

            again, please do explain your claim here: . Now, since you have made the claim that I somehow use those I disagree with as a form of masturbation, please do explain what you mean by that. Or is this yet one more baseless attack using what you hope are offensive words in order to try to poison the well, EC? “

            Like

  • erinchafig

    In Texas, as a homeschool you are considered a private school and are required to teach a curriculum that covers about seven subjects. That’s the whole requirement. While I do think that such loose requirements can lead to looney parents with radical ideologies raising equally looney children, I’m super thrilled that I do not have to jump through a bunch of hoops to homeschool.

    Liked by 1 person

    • hessianwithteeth

      Where I live, we can pretty much homeschool however we want, but we have to give progress reports to the school board each year. I like that the province keeps an eye on progress because it ensures that the child is actually being taught. Otherwise, it’s really easy to homeschool here.

      Liked by 1 person

  • Tabitha

    I’ve been homeschooled my entire life and (as you can probably tell from my latest post lol) I love it. I would hate going to public school and dealing with so many idiots every day. I would hate going to public school where ideals and morals which I am against are taught as fact. Homeschooling (if done correctly) can teach kids to be creative, to think for themselves, and to socialise WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE. Homeschooling encourages creative thinking, is easily customisable (since every kid learns differently, why teach them all the same?), and allows the kid to have some say in his/her curriculum. Now having said that I know several lovely public schoolers who are not influenced by atheistic public school morals and teachings. But generally speaking, homeschoolers are my favourite people in the world.

    Those are my thoughts! I know that not everyone agrees with me so please don’t get mad if you don’t believe the same as I do 😊our differences are beautiful! Lol 😛

    Like

    • hessianwithteeth

      Withteeth, being a biologist, and I aren’t concerned with science being taught as science. In fact, the amount of Christian curriculum bothers me because they are often written by people who are not trained scientists. I don’t think a layman should be telling a scientist that they are wrong about science anymore than thy should tell an electrician that they are wrong about wiring or an engineer that they are wrong about structural safety. Are concerns are more academic. The school system slows down progress a lot and expects children to all advance at the same pace. There is no room for individual learning styles or personal pacing. I also don’t actually think that schools do socialize. I want my kids to know how to associate with all different people. I don’t want them to be stuck with the people Withteeth and I decide are the right people, rather, I want them to be willing to associate with people they generally wouldn’t consider socializing with. Like people whose beliefs differ from their own, or people who are less advantaged than they are.

      Like

      • Tabitha

        True. No layperson should be telling a scientist their job; however, there are many esteemed Christian scientists. (Ken Ham, Dr. Morris, etc) But I’m not here to argue 😊
        I agree that the school system slows down progress and doesn’t seem to consider that some children progress differently from others. Homeschoolers, especially if you join a co-op, do socialise with more diverse people than, I believe, public schoolers.

        Like

        • hessianwithteeth

          There aren’t many co-op options where I live, but then, homeschooling is growing in popularity. But Withteeth and I have plans for socialization in case co-ops don’t pop up. Summer/day camps and extra-curricular activities are the main way we intend to socialize, and we intend to start that early.

          Like

          • Tabitha

            Sounds great! The area that I live in is full of co-ops, but camps and activities are a fun way to ‘socialise.’ I wonder sometimes how important socialising really is. We as humans weren’t made to be alone, but is it that important to be around other people all the time? And what is even meant, exactly, by “socialise”? I don’t know, that just interests me 😊

            Like

          • hessianwithteeth

            Personally, I’m not a big people person. Withteeth gets antsy when he spends too much time without other people, but I don’t. I think it rally depends on the person. I just want our kids to have friends, I don’t care if people think they’re awkward. I’m autistic, so awkward is in my nature. But some people need to be around people to feel energized. How much socialization is involved in their education will depend on the needs of the child.

            Like

          • Tabitha

            I agree. I’m not fond of spending too much time around people, but some are. It does definitely depend on the person!

            Like

          • equippedcat

            Sometimes you can stay in your desired interpersonal situation, but there are times when you are forced into an uncomfortable alternative. The person you need something from who is not eager to deal with you; the person who wants something from you which you are not eager to supply. Being able to deal with these kinds of situations is a key skill.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Tabitha

            This is true. Good definition, equippedcat 😊

            Like

          • equippedcat

            Each person has a level of interactions with others which is comfortable for them. More power to them. But the real key to socializing is being able to deal with those you come in contact with, with whom just avoiding them is not an option. Throughout life, there are people who you want or need to interact with, who may not make it easy, and there are people who want to interact with you that you don’t want to interact with and in some cases cannot interact with without damage. How to be able to deal with “anyone” you come into contact with is a key life skill.

            Liked by 1 person

  • equippedcat

    There are the “solid facts” (math, sciences, reading and writing, languages), the “malleable facts” (history, social studies), “culture” (music, art) and “opinions” (views on issues). Homeschooling has the potential to teach all of these the way you want, and you won’t be “surprised” at what your kids are learning (like the parents who found that their kids had to attest to the tenets of Islam in order to pass). Public schools teach what the school officials and the government deem important. And this is for the benefit of the school officials (propagate their views) and the government (generate the type of citizens which benefit the government), not you and not your children.

    Furthermore, many public schools lack any control over the students. The kids can do pretty much whatever they want, and lets face it, children are born with animal behaviors, and without control and correction from parents and school, sometimes grow up to be animals. Look at bullying, physical and mental, and the resulting suicides and/or misery. Look at the impacts “peer” pressure (I claim there is no peer pressure, only “inferior” pressure designed to bring people down to their level). Look at how kids see that schools capitulate when anyone complains about anything, teaching them that the way to solve any problem is to “protest” (riot) and/or sue.

    So public schools may (but not always) teach your kids enough “truth” that they can get along, even quite well, but it may not be in a manner you would prefer. The kids will almost certainly be “scarred”, but often not enough to seriously damage them or society. Home schooling can also teach kids the “truths” that you know, and avoid a lot of the damage that close contact with random, uncontrolled youth is likely to cause. But they can be stunted in their interpersonal skills, AND, the only way to learn to handle bad situations is to successfully handle them.

    So which? I don’t know, but I do know this. Whichever way you decide to go, you MUST be FULLY involved. If you home school, you must do it to standards at least equal to those of the public schools, and you must do everything practical to ensure your kids learn how to get along with other kids/people, including those who would harm them, deliberately or not. You must recognize your own areas of weakness, and find ways to get your kids up to snuff in those areas. On the other hand, if you go with the public school (or even a private school), you must be totally involved – know what the school is teaching, know how they are teaching it, and that your child is actually involved in the learning, and be aware of, and counter any negative influences they encounter. Every day, you need to find out what they learned, what they failed to learn, what they liked and what they disliked. And every night, you need to ensure that they do their homework, to acceptable standards.

    Yes, it is a lot of work, either way. And if you are not willing to do that work, why are you having kids? In my opinion, if you have kids and do not do everything possible to ensure they become self sufficient and able to function in society, you are engaging in a form of child abuse. And society abuse.

    Should there be control over homeschooling? I don’t think so, at least not at a day-to-day level. BUT, the child must be able to pass, each year or segment, the same tests that children at an equivalent level can pass in order to be accorded the same credentials. And if the child can not be brought up to snuff “at home” by the end of the next year/segment, then the home schooling must be suspended.

    What I wonder is how is it that morning sickness evolved? It seems like a counter survival trait which should have self-corrected.

    Like

  • lostinmist

    The current school system is designed to provide obedient factory and government labor. Socializing is something key it would lack without outreach to other parents. I don’t know.. Do kids in special ed classes face peer discrimination?

    Like

  • perfectpanicky

    I send my kids to public school and am happy about it. Before I had kids I thought homeschooling sounded pretty cool, but the reality of parenting made homeschooling, maybe not impossible, but definitely very unwise.

    Like

  • Ros

    I considered homeschooling my girls, but decided not to in the end. This was for two reasons. Firstly, because schools often have much better equipment and resources than I would have been able to provide, particularly at secondary school level (11+). Secondly, because I wouldn’t have been able to give them the same opportunity to mix with other children as they got at school. As I understand it, this doesn’t have to be a problem if there are other parents homeschooling their children locally. You can then meet for group sessions, which are often outdoors. I’m in touch with a parent (in the UK) who does this. As with everything, there are pros and cons, but her son has ADHD, so she felt it was the best thing for him.

    My girls also had a friend at school who had been homeschooled until she was about 12/13. At that point, she did have a few problems socialising and also with settling into the school system. She just didn’t know what was expected and that caused a few problems, particularly around the invasion of personal space. But she grew into a lovely young woman and has ended up doing very well.

    There are regulations here. The local council has the job of checking that schooling is happening and that it is adequate. I don’t know enough about it to know what criteria they use, but I do know that parents don’t have to follow the national curriculum, which seems fair enough to me. It makes sense to have regulations, but if they are too tight, you might as well send your child to school, because you won’t be able to tailor their education to their particular needs (which I assume is the whole point!).

    ‘Morning’ sickness is horrid. I was never actually sick, but I had the nausea all day and every day until the day after the babies were born. Whilst I could eat, I couldn’t drink anything except bottled water. No idea why, but I couldn’t get anything else down. It’s a strange thing, pregnancy. Not always a lot of fun, but worth it in the end 🙂

    Like

  • Ubi Dubium

    I think homeschooling can work for some kids, but would have been a disaster for mine. My kids have a hard time focusing in the home environment, and needed the structured school environment. They also are very good at academics, but have a hard time learning to work and socialize with other people. So that’s what they needed the most practice on, and they would not get that with homeschooling.

    I think homeschoolers ought to have to pass the same achievement exams that kids in public school do, and if they aren’t learning enough to manage that then they should not be homeschooled. I think that the government should be regulating homeschooling at least that much.

    Have you decided where you will settle down and raise your kids? If you can move to an area with good public schools that have a strong special ed. program available you might not need to consider homeschooling at all. I’m in Fairfax County, VA, and one reason that I made sure to live here was because of the excellent school system.

    I had morning sickness for three months, and then it went away and I felt great for the rest of the pregnancy. Hope yours goes away too, it’s hard to gain weight when you can’t keep food down. (I didn’t actually throw up, I was just nauseated all the time and didn’t want to eat. I lost weight my first trimester.)

    Like

Tell us what you think

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: