Enlisting Homeschoolers

It is disheartening to see that the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) is promoting service in the Army National Guard. According to a recent Home School Heartbeat:

More than ever, homeschool graduates are finding that their education has prepared them for open doors in many fields of opportunity. Today on Home School Heartbeat, HSLDA President Mike Smith and Army National Guard recruiter, Chaplain Paul Douglas, explore a door that recently opened a little wider for homeschool graduates.

Mike Smith:
Chaplain Douglas, the Army National Guard adopted a streamlined enlistment policy for homeschoolers this past year. Please tell our listeners about that.

Chaplain Paul Douglas:
Sure thing, Mr. Smith. The Homeschool Path to Honor is a new approach to bringing homeschool enlistees into the Army National Guard. Colonel Mike Jones, a homeschool dad himself, recognized very early on that the process was confusing to a lot of our recruiters. And a lot of times, homeschool families were being penalized—inadvertently—for being homeschoolers. So we looked at the policy. We looked at the way that it was constructed. We came up with a better way of organizing it. So if you go to the 1-800-Go-Guard.com website, you can see the Army National Guard Homeschool Path to Honor—really very simply, walks you through the whole process, tells you what the requirements are, helps families get their young people into the Army National Guard, if they so desire. Chaplain Tim Baer, who will be taking my place at the helm of the recruiting effort, he’s the director of that program now. He’s a good man. And we all want homeschoolers to succeed.

Mike:
Well, Chaplain Douglas, thanks for working to make these policy changes happen! We appreciate your service. And until next time, I’m Mike Smith.

I will never understand why parents who would never allow their children to set foot in a public school would encourage, or at least not discourage, their children to join the U.S. military and not only face government propaganda and immorality on a much greater scale than exists in the public schools, but participate in bringing death and destruction to the latest “enemy” of the U.S. empire.

Author: Laurence Vance

Laurence Vance holds degrees in history, theology, accounting, and economics. He has written and published twelve books and regularly contributes articles and book reviews to both secular and religious periodicals.

105 thoughts on “Enlisting Homeschoolers”

  1. Pardon me if I’m wrong about this, but I get the impression that most home-schooled kids are kept at home for religious reasons (to spare them the contamination of the theory of natural selection and comprehensive sex education). Onward Christian soldiers!

    1. I am a Ron Paul fan, atheist, regular antiwar.com reader, AND homeschool parent. Making blanket statements about large groups of people is dangerous and ignorant. Educate yourself before you open your mouth about something you clearly know nothing about!

        1. In the info that Dain posted, homeschooling for religious reasons was less than 30% of the total. ‘Nuff said……there are many, many reasons that parents choose to homeschool and using the old sterotypes of religious freaks wanting to shield their children from the big, bad world only shows ignorance on the topic. BTW, well said Dain…….

        2. Also of that 30% it was noted as Religious OR Moral reasons. So presumably some of the 30% chose a Moral reason other than just religion. I wonder what the percentage would have been for Political reasons? The percentage of evangelical nutjobs that homeschool is very small but even then I support their choice.

          Peace!

      1. I didn’t make a blanket statement and you are taking what I said much too personally. Indeed, the indignant, defensive reactions on this thread (not just those nested in this block) have changed my mind about the most common denominator of parents who choose homeschooling. I now think it may be paranoia and an anti-social streak.

        Dain’s contribution was useful and I thank him for it.

        1. Homeschoolers are defensive for a reason. It’s because they are constantly attacked as being some kind of wierdos.

          Peace!

        2. “It’s because they are constantly attacked as being some kind of wierdos (sic).”

          Gee, I wonder why.

        3. Fan of Raimondo and Garris, you can’t get it or won’t get it that your first comment was offensive. Let me put it this way. If I had started a thread with: Pardon me if I’m wrong about this, but I get the impression that all people who think and act the Fan of Raimondo and Garris are idiots, wouldn’t you find it insulting. Starting an insult with an apology doesn’t make it less insulting.

          Peace!

    2. Fan of Raimondo and Garris,

      You really don’t seem to get the inaccuracy of making generalizations about large groups of people, do you? Humans would get along better if they didn’t make ignorant assumptions about others without knowing the facts.

      1. Humans would get along better if they were coolheaded in responding to someone who presumed that he could be wrong by apologizing in advance if his IMPRESSION was wrong. Perhaps you could learn from Dain. I hope your children are not having to deal with an overly protective and hypersensitive parent.

        1. I’m not quite sure why your so upset Fan of Raimondo and Garris, you started this thread with a derogatory comment and now you have been called on it. Big deal! First you insult this person with your “Onward Christian Soldier” comment, and now you are suggesting they are poor parents. Your simple comming off as a defensive jerk. I have read enough of your comments to know that your not exactly polite all the time. So why should they be? If you can’t take it don’t dish it out!

          Peace!

  2. You’re both wrong.

    Until recently, homeschoolers were put in an enlistment tier with high school drop outs. Rather than promoting national guard service, HSLDA is presenting another field that has opened up to homeschoolers.

    If you spent a modicum of time perusing homeschool forums and blogs, you would find that a very wide range of society is turning to homeschooling as an education option for their children.

    Have a free day.

  3. Christy is right, there is a very wide range of people who choose to homeschool. Having said that, I do find that a large majority of the parents that I know personaly who homeschool are not nearly as likely to agree with government policies. Furthermore, you will find that many Ron Paul fans and Libertarians homeschool. It’s very unlikely that they will indocrinate their children like our public schools do. Yes some parents will do the indoctrination themselves but I actually think one of the reasons why states like Califonia are against homeschool is that they want control over the brainwashing.

    On a second note, I find it discusting that any “Chaplain” would be for recruiting. Who Would Jesus Bomb?

    Peace!

    1. Chaplain ?

      As I wrote to one of my former pro-Bush ministers, it is true that fascism has come to this country draped in the flag and carrying the cross, the Iron Cross.

      1. an antiques dealer recently explained to me that the iron cross, which was a german war medal, was made of iron instead of precious metal. it became a known quanttity after citizens of germany were sacrificing their precious metal jewelry to generate money for the war effort of that time, sometime in the 1800’s. people donated their precious metal jewelry and it was replaced with iron equivalents. this included jewelry like rosaries and gold necklaces with crosses symbolizing Christianity. in other words, the iron cross was a patriotic german medal first for the award itself, and as well for the sacrificed precious metals.

        since at least ww2, the iron cross symbolized fascism.

        the wikipedia does not agree with the antiquities expert i guess.

  4. Home schooling is providing an education for your children. Public schools don’t educate
    your children they train them. An education by very definition must be competency based.
    Any system that evaluates primarily with standardized tests is results based. You can train
    that way but you can’t educate. Of course that’s what a fascist plutocracy needs, Pavlovian responses to orders not clear, critical thinking. Who would participate in perpetual war if they
    were educated well enough to figure out the real purpose behind it. Think about it.

    Fred54 in Boston

  5. I recommend to any homeschooler wanting to “serve their country” to consider being an entrepreneur and starting a business and creating jobs. That is “service” I can thank in a country that is bankrupt and in desperate need of producers, dreamers, and ideas made manifest.

    Thank you, Laurence Vance. I always treasure your writing.

    1. Why would somebody start a business in a time like this? I mean, who would like to work 12-15 hours to build a business to pay 40% of their income to feed the people who all their lives stay on welfare watching soap operas?? The country is bankrupt because of the communist/socialism ideas brought in this country.

      1. “Why would somebody start a business in a time like this”? Who says you need to work 12-15 hours to build a business. I assume your talking about per day. Or do you mean per-week? As for the benifits of starting your own business they are many. I know many people who do very well with their own businesses and employ many more. I would say more than 3/4 of the jobs in my town are small business generated. I run a small business out of my home and make more money now than I ever did before. I have a few part time employees and I work a max of 20 hours per week. By the way my wife has stayed at home with our children for over 20 years. No welfare either. I guess me and my friends who have small businesses should just go out of business and 3/4 of my town can go on the dole or just starve to death.

        Peace!

        1. I can see Cristina’s point, though. As the parasitic state tightens its grip on its host (i.e., the productive sector of society, particularly the entrepreneurial class) with a never-ending avalanche of regulation, taxation, and other forms of interference, the incentive to produce is curtailed accordingly. After all, why invest your precious time and capital (be it monetary or human) into a business endeavor that will, for all practical purposes, be co-opted by the State? As unrealistic as it might be in practice, Ayn Rand’s vision of a capitalist/entrepreneurial “general strike” as set forth in Atlas Shrugged is certainly warranted as a means of resistance.

          Perhaps the best thing that any liberty lover can do is to “go underground.” As the dollar (and probably most other major international currencies) collapses, alternative means of commerce (e.g., barter) will become a de facto standard for exchange. Be prepared to take advantage of it.

        2. Right on Liberranter! I have been telling everyone for years to get prepared. One of the nice things about having my own business is that I can take as many tax breaks, loopholes, whatever you want to call them so I don’t pay the money into the State coffers. I have taken almost all the extra money I have and used it to prep for the coming choas. I still spend some on local charity. Other than that I have put it into becoming self sufficient. Gold, Guns, Land, Seeds, Silver, livestock etc. My wife spins her own wool, everything from rabits and sheep, to my dog Bob. I call it Bobwool. Spring is coming soon to Northern Michigan and I can’t wait to get my garden going, Heirloom seeds so I can start them year after year. My Fruit trees are mature. I hunt and fish and have butchered my own for 25 years. My project this summer is solar. I heat with wood and have a hand pump for water as well. This is only a small part of the prep work. But trust me even if nothing ever happens it’s still a great way to live. The security that comes with the knowledge that you don’t need anyone but yourselves is priceless.

          I know this can’t work for everyone. But everyone should have a plan. Just don’t plan on coming here. I have a feeling that roadblocks will already be in place. If I lived in the city I would suggest buying some land in the country and learning how to use it efficiently.

          Peace!

        3. Yours sounds like a satisfying life, Brad Smith. Well done, and I wish my lifestyle were a little closer to yours. However, I can say my home area is even colder than yours so good luck with the garden–it takes a lot of extra work up here.

      2. “to pay 40% of their income to feed the people who all their lives stay on welfare watching soap operas”?!

        For sometime now I’ve been hearing so many people who call themselves conservatives fulminate over and over against what they call welfare mothers but couldn’t care much about the biggest welfare recipient of them all such as the military and big corprations and banks.Many of them didn’t see anything wrong with the puplic financing of the mega sports complex for the wealthy sports owners.

        Read this:

        Former AIG Exec at Center of Meltdown Got Paid Millions for Little Work
        http://www.propublica.org/article/former-aig-exec-at-center-of-meltdown-got-paid-millions-for-little-work-101

        “During his eight years at AIG, Cassano earned $280 million and, after leaving the company in March, was slated to receive $1 million a month (document) as a consultant through the end of 2008, disclosed Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

        Cassano’s contract was terminated the day before a congressional hearing on AIG’s collapse last week. (Waxman called the government’s $123 billion bailout of AIG a “direct result” of the losses incurred by Cassano’s department.”

        http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/10/the_name_most_associated_with.html

  6. What is the Chaplain leading his own personal “Crusade”?

    Why is a man of religion promoting service in the Imperial Military? What part of “thou shalt not kill” does he not understand?

    1. It is “thou shalt not murder” not “kill”. Murder is for innocents, killing is for guilty. There was a lot of “killing” de guilty in the Bible, so it’s not anti-Bible.

      1. Right! See these:
        “Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.” 1 Samuel 15:2-3 (NIV)
        “All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman.” 2 Chronicles 15:13 (NIV)

        No wonder, in the current War of Terror campaigns, the army “don’t do body counts”. All those civilians who got bombed in Iraq & Afghanistan, including the children & babies, must be guilty of something. So, for who did Christ die?

      2. Cristina: OK thou shalt not murder. War is Murder. The only time it’s otherwise is in self defense. Iraq was NO threat to us in any way shape or form. I’m all for homeschooling and self education. However, reading your other comments it’s obvious you need to spend a little more time educating yourself. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, Muslims don’t hate us because we are free or because we are Mostly Christian or because we are a Democracy (we aren’t but I just wondered if you would even catch that). The few that hate us is growing but only because of how we treat them and their property.

        You Say “It’s about loving this country so much that they fight to keep it free. But don’t worry, when muslims will impose the sharia law, we won’t have any problems any longer….BECAUSE WE WILL BE DEAD”!!!!

        Are you serious or just putting us on? If you love this country so much you should educate yourself. Find out the real reasons why we are less safe and not more by fighting over there, and then come back and talk. You are doing yourself, this country, and presumably your own children a disservice by staying ignorant of the facts.

        Your also make a poor showing for homeschooling. Your ignorance speaks volumes.

        Peace!

      3. Cristina is woefully incorrect on one count and correct on the other. In the first place, she repeats a translation myth that has been spread by warmongers during the 20th century. The word “kill” in the commandment is the correct translation of the Hebrew, not “murder.” The verb used is non-specific, and thus Cristina has made herself a willing dupe for the warmongers; it is best not to repeat everything one “hears” on the internet. Furthermore, translations of this verb into Latin and English have been rendered as “kill,” not “murder” for the same reason. Here is an excellent article by the blog poster Laurence Vance: http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance111.html

        On the other count, there is much killing and murder in the Bible’s Old Testament. While many Christians seem to find “spiritualized” meaning in the nationalistic religion found there, I don’t. So Cristina is correct on that count. But at least stop propagating the myth about “kill” vs. “murder.”

      4. Incredible, Cristina rewrites the 10 commandments in order to justify her craven, bloodthirsty, revenge seeking nature. Me I’m a Christian. Christ’s message to me is rarely so clear to me as it is about killing. And I don’t need to go to obscure scripture for direction. The message came from his own mouth numerous times.

        He who lives by the sword..
        Turn the other cheek..

        just to name a few. Go Ahead Christ-ina (what an oxmoron of a name) rationalize those quotes and the context with your neocon humanist analysis.

  7. So, let’s see if I’ve got this straight:

    Homeschoolers, generally pious about eternal matters and skeptical toward temporal power, withdraw their children from government-run schools so as to protect them from the un-Godly influence and philosophical errors promoted therein.

    Yet these same people are easy marks for the predators who seek to stuff their children into a State-issued costume and feed them into the maw of the war machine, sending them abroad to kill and die on behalf of the same un-Godly government to which they wouldn’t trust the education of those same children.

    1. It’s about loving this country so much that they fight to keep it free. But don’t worry, when muslims will impose the sharia law, we won’t have any problems any longer….BECAUSE WE WILL BE DEAD!!!!

      1. Right on the mark. Make sure your homeschooled children worship the military and become willing to serve whatever warmongering monstrosity currently befouls the White House. God forbid if we should teach our children to think for themselves or to question their appointed leaders. Ours not to question why, ours but to do and die.

        Oh yes, I almost forgot that I’m quaking in my boots about Arabs swarming across the river to take over my state. If they ever got this far they’d freeze to death in their tracks.

      2. I think that “cristina” is really “tim r” with a dress on. Anyone else notice this?

      3. “that they fight to keep it free”

        Why is it that the people who are pushing for war the hardest are the ones who want others to do do fighiting and dieing for them?

        Do they really know the meaning of the word ‘Free’?

        Why do they always give themselves the rights to impose their thinkings,will, belief system,or so called values on other people in other countries,but other people of of other countries do not have those rights?

        Why have the people in the US always considered their freedom to be always threathened by people in very far away places such Vietnam,Korea,Lebnaon,Iran,Kuwait,Iraq…etc?

        Why do many in the US still that history or events start at the moment that effect them?That they view history in a vaccume of unrealted events.

        “when muslims will impose the sharia law, we won’t have any problems any longer….BECAUSE WE WILL BE DEAD!!!!”

        Garbbage in ,Garbbage out.

      4. The Yoo-Bybee Memoranda
        Blueprints for a Police State

        “Seven newly released memos from the Bush Justice Department reveal a concerted strategy to cloak the President with power to override the Constitution. The memos provide “legal” rationales for the President to suspend freedom of speech and press; order warrantless searches and seizures, including wiretaps of U.S. citizens; lock up U.S. citizens indefinitely in the United States without criminal charges; send suspected terrorists to other countries where they will likely be tortured; and unilaterally abrogate treaties. According to the reasoning in the memos, Congress has no role to check and balance the executive. That is the definition of a police state”

        http://www.counterpunch.org/cohn03042009.html

    2. Will Grigg, the percentage of the homeschoolers that are raised by evangelical nutjobs is not as large as you think. Thier children would be brainwashed by their parents and their churches with or without school. For this group it’s the influence of religion that has warped their brains, not education. But your right in that it does seem incredibly hipocritical. I’ll tell you who I feel sorry for: their children!

      Peace!

      1. Brad Smith,

        You are referring to the evangelicals? Your comment is not entirely clear. I needed to read all your comments posted on this topic to understand your meaning.

        1. Many different people homeschool for many reasons. Some of the homeschoolers are evengelicals who don’t want their kids exposed to the theory of evolution. However, many of them believe in the end times and support pastors such as John Hagee and other nutjobs like him. Sure everyone should have freedom of religion and expression they should be allowed to school their children anyway they wish. I call the evanglelicals nutjobs because thats how I see it.

          My other comments were not posted towards the evangelicals. Brainwashing comes in many forms, Religion being one of the worst. The Government is the largest. I support homeschooling because it gives the parents the opportunity to teach their children as they choose. If they wish to follow nutjobs and brainwash their children thats to bad, but it’s not the Feds business (or mine) to regulate. I wish to be left alone to raise my children as I see fit and support the rights of others to do the same. I will still call them nutjobs and they can call me whatever they wish.

          Peace!

        2. Brad: Then I hope you favor abolishing all compulsory-school-attendance laws, which are the #1 obstacle to public school reform (assuming such reform is possible). Even if there were no such thing as public schools, those laws would still be evil because they are based on the sinister notion that children are government property.

        3. “Then I hope you favor abolishing all compulsory-school-attendance laws”

          Right on! No one should every be forced to send “their” children to school.

          Peace!

  8. The homeschooling movement started with the Hippies. You can still find a lot of them here in Austin. Read Grace Llewellyn’s _Teenage Liberation Handbook_ and then ask yourself if they are religious nuts.

    1. “Grace Llewellyn’s _Teenage Liberation Handbook_”

      One of the best books ever written about life and education. I love this book.

  9. Personally, I heartily approve of homeschooling. Homeschooled kids are literate, informed, and mature, unlike their counterparts in the public (i.e., government-issue) “schools.”

    The government-issue “school” system is loaded with incompetent, time-serving, live-off-the-taxpayer hacks. If the kids learn anything, it’s purely by accident.

    It’s instructive, by the way, that President Obama The Divine is sending his daughters to the Sidwell Friends School. The “elite” never risk their own kids in the
    government-issue “school” system.

    1. The Clintons sent Chelsea to that same school. The running joke back then was that if she was in a DC public school her Secret Service agents would be outgunned. That’s likely even truer today.

      Back in the ’90s I read an interesting stat in The Freeman: After adjusting for income, public school teachers are four times more likely than any other group to send their kids to private schools. Sadly, a member of my extended family engages in that hypocrisy — she and her husband teach in their local public schools, while their two children attend a religious private school.

      1. I’d forgotten that Chelsea Clinton attended the Sidwell
        Friends School. (When Clinton took office in 1993, there was speculation as to whether she would attend the D.C. public schools. I remember a joke to the effect that if she did, the SS would have to take her to and from school in an armored personnel carrier.)

        Interesting, isn’t it, how so many politician who are under the thumb of the teachers’ unions send their own kids

        1. to private schools. Why? They don’t want their kids in the same government-issue “schools” that turn out hordes of functional illiterates. And many government-issue “school’ teachers send their kids to private schools. What the hell’s the matter? Don’t they believe in their own product?

          Compulsory education laws are bullshit.

      2. I’d forgotten that Chelsea Clinton attended the Sidwell
        Friends School. (When Clinton took office in 1993, there was speculation as to whether she would attend the D.C. public schools. I remember a joke to the effect that if she did, the SS would have to take her to and from school in an armored personnel carrier.)

        Interesting, isn’t it, how so many politicians who are under the thumb of the teachers’ unions send their own kids to private schools. Why? They don’t want their kids in the same government-issue “schools” that turn out hordes of functional illiterates. And many government-issue “school” teachers send their kids to private schools. What the hell’s the matter? Don’t they believe in their own product?

        Compulsory education laws are bullshit.

    2. You are engaging in the sort of generalizations so detested by Homeschoolparent in her diatribes above.

      By the way, my publicly schooled nephew graduated from college two years ago summa cum laude.

  10. “Homeschool Path to Honor”? What a mouthfull of mush. I was in the military – how about “Homeschool Path to Drunkness, Whoremongering, and generally Swinish Behavior”? If you want a good idea of what military life does to people, the recent movie, “In the Valley of Elah” is as good an example as I can think of.

    1. Spot on richard vajs, if parents think sending their children to University is a good way to start them on the road to drunkeness they should take a good look at the military. If you want your children to party hard sign them up. I once saw a marine unit doing PT by drinking a beer every 100 yards until the last man was standing.

      Peace!

  11. This guy, http://www.flsenate.gov/Legislators/index.cfm?Members=View+Page&District_Num_Link=021&Submenu=1&Tab=legislators&chamber=Senate&CFID=129465238&CFTOKEN=41440125

    hs proposed drug testing people who file unemployment claims. Can we spread this around and possibly spank him before something like this takes hold.

    I paid into the system and no one gave a dang if I was stoned or not. And now that I might need to get some back they want to set conditions.

    Is this even legal?

  12. 1: i agree entirely with mr vance’s post.

    2: the first homeschooling advocate i remember was frank zappa. back then the homeschool sympathisers that i knew were pinkos.

    3: having been educated in catholic schools (grades K – 12) and having taught in both private schools and public schools (grades 5 – 12), i know for a certain fact that this:

    “The government-issue “school” system is loaded with incompetent, time-serving, live-off-the-taxpayer hacks. If the kids learn anything, it’s purely by accident.”

    is wrong. the public school where i taught sent graduates to places like MIT and duke, and has produced national award winners in science and latin. the private schools where i have worked have atmospheres fetid of socio-political correctness. yet all were more competent in tutelage than the catholic school i attended in days of yore.

  13. addendum to #2 above: zappa himself was a libertarian, but, again, back then the homeschool sympathisers that i knew were pinkos, and counter-culture types.

      1. Why does it matter if Petey is for homeschooling or against it? Why do we as a society care as long as parents’ intent is to raise productive members of society? Homeschooling is a right in this country and therefore should be treated as a respectful choice of lifestyle. The homeschoolers that I know care much more about their children’ education and integrity than the folks I know that ship their kids off to school as soon as they are legally able.

        1. I’m all for homeschooling. In fact I see public mandated schooling as evil incarnate. Does it benifit some people, sure but at what price? It’s like any other Socialist/Communist program steal from some, give to others and use force if necessary to compel the unwilling., with the overall goal being the indocrination of the masses. I’m sure there are very few “teachers” who take this point of view but it is a fact. Mandated public schooling IS a major part of the communist platform. Without it the masses connot be controlled. Although now I think the mass media has taken much of the job unto themselves.

          I know most teachers are hardworking people who strive to do a difficult job. However, most of them are brainwashed sheeple with the truly awake being few and far between.

          As for why does it matter if Petey is for or against? Well, it’s pretty hard to debate someone when you don’t understand their position, and like I said I was curious.

          Peace!

      2. very much on favor. however, having read your risible comments here about “the communist plaatform”, i think we have nothing to debate.

        1. That’s fine with me petey. I’m no Masterdebater anyway. I’ll let my comments stand for themselves.

          Peace!

  14. Truth in advertising before I go further: I am a Christian; a philosophical anarchist; I homeschooled both my children — one for 12 years, the other for 8; and I would have trouble if either of them joined the armed forces.

    What is rather “disheartening” is that Mr. Vance uses the exact same club of “How can you call yourself a Christian when you … ?” that many Christian homeschoolers use on their fellow Christians who’ve chosen to send their children to public school.

    It is disheartening because none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Indeed, one can find atheists, Mormons, Scientologists, Hindus, etc. who are as morally troubled about American empire and public schools, and for the same reasons, as Mr. Vance. So what gives?

    Mr. Vance and his fellow fundamentalist Christians are moralists and moralizers — they are obsessed with Law, at the expense of Gospel. They are modern day Pharisees.

    As Christians, it might behoove all of them to get (re)acquainted with the idea of general grace. E.g., it is not inherently sinful to serve in the military, nor is it sinful to send one’s children to public schools.

    1. I agree with all of your comment accept the last line. You state “it is not inherently sinful to serve in the military” I would agree with that if you were serving in say the swiss army. I would also say that for a large part of our military that, they know not what they do. So I’m not sure if they could be considered as sinners or not I’m no expert in that area and I don’t care to be. However, if I were to join the military with my knowledge of what war is, it would be a sin. I know that this war is murderous. If I took part in it I would be a murderer and thats a sin the last time I checked. Knowingly abbetting murder is a sin and this war is killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Therefore, joining the military may not be a “Sin” for a sheeple but it definately is for the rest of us.

      I think part of the reasoning behing the article was to point out that this war is murder and if you understand that, you cannot join the military at this point in time without abetting murder or becoming a murderer yourself.

      Peace!

      1. When I said “Therefore, joining the military may not be a “Sin” for a sheeple but it definately is for the rest of us”. I should have said Therefore, joining the military may not be a “Sin” for a sheeple but it definately is for the rest of us christians. For an athiest who knows that this war is murderous it would simply be a crime.

        Peace!

      2. I understand.

        Yet, after the Lord’s life on earth, the apostles’ letters, and two-thousand years of serious thought and discussion, I think it’s fair to say that no one has yet proved the inherent sinfulness of military service. And thus, the morality of it is neither here nor there and in no way the exclusive burden of Christians to discern.

        Indeed, what the Christian does exclusively hold, is the good news that one is not saved by making right choices in life, but by the person and finished work of Jesus Christ.

        War, politics, economics, arts, etc, are all of the sphere of common or general grace. This is where many of us find ourselves gathered together to read Antiwar.com instead of The Weekly Standard. We may be the wiser, more moral, indeed more superior for it, but we are in no way more Christian by it.

        1. Bob, you “salvation through grace” people always seem to excuse the worst behavior and thus seem to give up on trying to behave in a Christian manner. I don’t buy that theology. It didn’t wash with Augustine; it didn’t wash with Luther; and it doesn’t wash with Nazi-Party-Member Christians; and it doesn’t wash now. You have chosen the words of Paul over the words of Christ, who said “turn the other cheek” and “who lives by the sword…” You pick and choose to be anything BUT Christian, and then you resort to “grace” instead of fixing your bad behavior. I am not and rarely meet real Christians. It is a true rarity. There are many who invoke the C word, but few practitioners. Apparently, the practice of Christianity is optional with the “grace” people.

  15. My brother is homeschooled. Many of his books teach about Jesus as dying for him. The books also teach creationism, but he was told about the evolution theory. When he was little, he was confused. We explained it to him best we could, and now that he’s much older (12) he understands. The curriculum he learns from was the best one out there. At least my sister said it was as my mom assigned to her to the duty of looking for the best homeschool materail out there.

    (His math books even mention Jesus!)

    The rest of us went to public schools.

    My brother’s a very outgoing and hyper kid. He’s exposed to non-Muslims too, through our neighbors and our friends as well.

    If Arabs every swim across and impose Shariah law on the US, trust me you can count on American Muslims to help you put them back out.

    Peace

    P.S. Muslims love Jesus too. (I recently had a man demand that I accept him as my savior while going up an elevator to my work).

  16. After receiving my history degree back in the mid-eighties, I continued on to gain a “State- Approved” teaching certificate so as to put my degree to direct usage. Midway through the second semester of indoctrination, I was suffering through a class titled “Teaching the Exceptional Child”. Prior to the actual commencement of the class, I was somewhat excited about the possibility of actually learning something in my “Education Classes”, as the 18 hours suffered through the prior semester more resembled propaganda sessions justifying the necessity of the Public School System and concurrently serving as a forum for whining about the low pay received by teachers. “Increase taxes!” Ho hum.

    The “Exceptional Child” we were being trained to indoctrinate was not the brilliant prodigy, but, rather, those waifs who either through genetic misfortune or substance abuse during gestation by the mother, were what we used to classify as “retarded”. This was the beginning of “Mainstreaming”, when due budgetary restraints and stupidity, the already somewhat overburdened “teacher”(student-teacher ratios)was going to have the “Special Ed” kids dumped into the regular classroom. Brilliant! Simply brilliant!

    Additionally, the vast majority of those in the “Education Program” were “Education majors”. No specialty in any classical discipline was required that demanded any intellectual rigor – they were simply “educators” who knew nothing except what the “State” required to educate. Secular dogmatics.

    This was also the period that marked the beginning of greater concern for the esteem of the student rather than measured academic success. And why not? If the teachers themselves knew very little, why demand the opposite of such from your charges? We were entering an “New Age” so to speak, where we were to care more about how little Johnny felt about his “F” than demanding that the lazy little runt apply himself. Can you hear Barry Manilow singing “Feelings” in the background?

    During the same semester, I was also required to teach a class at the local high school as well as sit as an observer in one. “Chaos in the classroom” was an apt description. Ten to fifteen minutes were required for the “teacher” to settle the “students” down to a level where any teaching could even take place. Even once this state of affairs had been reached, the teacher seemed more intent upon being viewed as a “friend” rather than a respected mentor. This behavior was endemic from 8:00-3:30, in every classroom.

    I had managed to get through High School during the tumultuous times of the late sixties and early seventies, when war and revolutionary thinking permeated the campuses. But comparatively speaking, the classrooms were rather orderly. I sat back in reflection upon what I was witness to, and reconsidered my so-called “career choice”. What I was witnessing was the creation of a recipe to be constructed from the assemblage of ingredients that could only lead to failure.

    I had worked in construction for ten years prior to entering college, and decided right there and then, that because the system itself was in a state of self-congratulatory collapse, regardless of my efforts, failure was an absolute certainty. Then, to quote George Thorogood, I admonished myself to “Get a haircut and get a real job”. Back to success in construction I went.

    As time and circumstances changed, my wife and I found ourselves homeschooling all of our children due to the reasons cited above. Academic scholarships awaited them all.

    I cannot help but part with this little tale though. My parents had sent us to Parochial Schools for the first eight years, and all of us found ourselves a couple grades ahead of our Public School peers upon entry into the secular realm. That may well have been because every nun who taught us was named Sister Mary Diesel Locomotive, but facts are facts.

    Finding myself married with children and after the experience illustrated above, my wife and I thought perhaps putting our offspring in Catholic School was in order. Well, as it turned out, the nature of the “Order” had changed over time. Rather than pushing for the excellence in academic performance that Catholic Schools had been noted for during previous generations, we belatedly discovered that said schools had become quite trendy. Trendy to the point that “Sex Education” was being taught from First Grade on up.

    I care not what the afficianatos of such “education” believe, but before this inanity was introduced into the Academy, illegitimate births were statistically low in this country. The more we “educate” on the matter, the worse comes the data. So one evening our fifth grade son, all of eleven years old, handed me a sheet of paper with a mimeographed vagina on it, asking for assistance in the labeling of various parts. There are words, most of them adjectives to describe my reaction, so you get the point. I’m spending how many thousands a year per child on top of my property taxes for this???

    After an animated conversation with the Chief Nun, one where my delicate wife said to her, “If I want him to learn this I’ll hire him a prostitute!”, our still mostly innocent children were no longer required to attend the “Sex Education” classes. “Morals”, “Ethics” or “Logic” anyone? We then chose to homeschool all four.

    “War is the health of the State”, said Randolph Bourne. It may be healthy for the State, but it is most unhealthy for the individual participants. Unless such action is in self-defense, it is the most amoral behavior man can engage in. To the recruiter I say this – “Hell no, we won’t go”! And God help you if you show up to try to take what is not yours!

    Anyone who describes a “Recruiter” as a “Good Man” is a fool, and is either deluded or a damned liar. If he was a “Good Man”, he would be in another line of “work”, engaged in something constructive rather than destructive. This sort of thinking, this “martial mindset” is nothing but a cancer upon the soul of mankind, and recruiters are but one of those millions of metasticizing cells whose genetic programming is the destruction of the healthy cells around it. To hell with them and the psychosis which drives them!

    “Just following orders!”

  17. And Bob –

    “Grace” is defined as “In favor of”.

    Certain behaviors are required to maintain oneself in such a state, and some behaviors are certain to remove you from such. A “State of Grace” is not an absolute.

    Engaging in murderous violence in far-flung lands for the sake of the fortunes of a few rich men is not gracious behavior.

  18. Was I talking about “engaging in murderous violence in far-flung lands for the sake of the fortunes of a few rich men”? No, I was talking about military service.

    But since you bring it up, I’m not sure there’s ever been more than a handful of wars that were not “murderous violence in far-flung lands for the sake of the fortunes of a few rich men.”

    You know exactly what I meant and what I was talking about. This is silly.

  19. Ergo – we both just aptly described “Military Service”.

    And have a nice vaccination with some Depleted Uranium to go with it, and all that lovely and competent care from the V.A. for everything from the non-existent PTSD to your new prosthesis.

    Would you like a Medal to go with that?

  20. I’m guessing Vance’s disappointment is based on assumption (valid or not) that many homeschoolers are Christian libertarians of a sort. Apparently not the HSLDA.

    This reminds me of the disappointment following Ron Paul’s dismal showing in “Live Free or Die” New Hampshire.

    Unfortunately, a huge number of “libertarians” are LTMF’s (not to be confused with MILF’s)…Low-Tax Militaristic Fascists.

  21. I have a BS in Biology and consider myself a Christian.

    Regarding evolution, it is only a weak poorly-constructed hypothesis and was never a theory to me. No one has seen a frog turn into a human. We put pieces of the puzzle of micro-evolution together based upon fossils but all is conjecture and there is no absolute proof. My argument against macro-evolution is that if you believe that man evolved from lower species, then eventually that lower species evolved from non-living matter (ie: Big Bang Theory of life). Ahother name for this is Spontaneous Generation, another hypothesis that was long discredited. The argument dies there, as it should.

    How does this relate to homeschooling ? Government schools teach evolution like it is some sort of sacred text. To me, macro-evolution is as discredited as the idea of the sun orbiting around the earth and a flat earth theory. Homeschoolers have a better understanding of the world around them because schools today are lousy and we should have the right to choose where we educate our children.

    Freedom rocks !!

    1. Corkey-

      For someone who claims a “B.S.” (in actuality, the initials are “B.Sc.”) your grasp of abiogenesis is shallow indeed. “Spontaneous generation” prohibits the emergence of fully-formed organisms in isolation. It in no way forfends the emergence of self-reproducing organic macromolecules under the proper chemical and thermic conditions which lies at the base of abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is not simply a variant of “spontaneous generation”- the two are utterly and completely distinct. Your alleged “proof”, in sum, is canard, and for more reasons than your misreprentation of abiogenesis. Evolution is merely a logical corollary of inheritance, variation, and non-random selection, and can be easily observed in everything from the breeding of animals to the speciation of certain insects. What you refer to is the theory of common descent which in any case does not strictly require abiogenesis. In principle, such an early progenitor of life could result from agency. In either case, the verdict of genetic data and the fossil record is decisively in favour of evolution, irrespective of its primordial origins.

      1. I respectfully disagree but I don’t feel the need to have to talk like a “snot” in the process especially when you have demonstrated nothing to me. A B.S. is a correct and proper title and always has been. If you don’t like, too bad.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life

        Abiogenesis, your fancy “pinkies-up” term is the same thing as Spontaneous Generation but at a different time. Its the same thing !! The only difference is when it happened. Life never came from non-life and if you believe that then you believe an unscientific fairy tale. There is absolutely no proof of this. It is a weak hypothesis at best.

        And I stand by my comments about evolution. Micro evolution is probable, macro evolution means that the original “life form” from which all is derived had to be “non-life” at some point. Good luck with that one.

        1. Nonsense.

          I have not taken a “snotty” tone; you have merely chosen to construe my missive in a particular fashion. Interestingly, from the very top of the wikipedia article you link to:

          In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, or origin of life, is the study of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter. It should not be confused with evolution, which is the study of how living things change over time.

          Macroevolution is conceptually separate from abiogenesis, and it requires a remarkable distortion of logic to claim that it must necessarily presuppose the latter. As I remarked, the “first life” from which all other forms eventually evolved might, in principle, originate from a conscious- divine, if you like- agent. Macroevolution is simply a process through which entire taxa evolve over time- it does not automatically imply abiogenesis. Speaking of which:

          The only difference is when it happened. Life never came from non-life and if you believe that then you believe an unscientific fairy tale.

          Are you issuing this as a categorical assertion? Because there is nothing innately “unscientific” about a contingent proposition that states that life might emerge from non-life- anything capable of generating testable hypotheses is “scientific” in the customary sense of abiding by the scientific method. In fact, there is no reason to draw a sharp line between “life” and “non-life”- viruses, as complex macromolecules, straddle the boundary between the two categories. Why not “non-life” to “sub-life” to “full life”?

          There is absolutely no proof of this. It is a weak hypothesis at best.

          As you like. But don’t go about conflating a lack of proof with inherent lack of testability.

        2. I will further note that your contention that abiogenesis is equivalent to spontaneous generation is an empty assertion offered without proof or argument of any kind.

        3. You speak in many words and technical jargon but it doesn’t make you correct as you are stating opinions while making the discussion much more complicated than it should be.

          I stand by my assertion that the two so-called “theories” are the same except they are purported to happen in different eras with life coming from non-life. Since no one was around then, it is all speculation. Because we cannot create the same conditions in the lab, means we should accept it? And when did a virus or macromolecule mutate into a life form, I missed that memo too ? Where is your proof that this ever happened ?

          Spontaneous Generation, Abiogenesis and Evolution all have one thing in common: wishful thinking. Study them all you like but no one should be forced to believe them. The longer that I have read about these things the less that I believe any of them.

          And Brad Smith brings another good point. Whenever the government is involved in forcing someone to believe something, chances are they are probably wrong and I don’t think there is any denying that fact.

          And again, this discussion is about individual rights, not about how the world began.

        4. When you make fallacious and unsupported statements about evolution that reflect ignorance, I feel obliged to correct them:

          You speak in many words and technical jargon but it doesn’t make you correct as you are stating opinions while making the discussion much more complicated than it should be.

          “Technical jargon”, which should be perfectly lucid, even rudimentary, to you if your familiarity with the subject is as great as you claim, is a necessary component of precision. One doesn’t do justice to a complex scientific subject with layman’s terms.

          I stand by my assertion that the two so-called “theories” are the same except they are purported to happen in different eras with life coming from non-life.

          Not in the slightest. Spontaneous generation postulates the emergence of fully formed complex organisms ex nihilo whereas abiogenesis envisions organic macromolecules forming in certain chemical environment and accumulating complexity over a long period of time. You haven’t an ounce of support for this assertion, and I would recommend either supporting or jettisoning it.

          Because we cannot create the same conditions in the lab, means we should accept it? And when did a virus or macromolecule mutate into a life form, I missed that memo too ? Where is your proof that this ever happened ?

          One can deduce a range of possibilities from the existing body of knowledge about organic chemistry and indications of conditions on a primordial Earth, but yes, ultimately, you’re quite correct we have no direct proof that it happened. I am not making any claims about the veracity of abiogenesis, I am simply disputing the twin pillars of your argument; namely, your suggestion that it is strictly impossible and your spurious identification of it with macroevolution. As I said before, the first life might, theoretically, be the work of God while evolution may take over from this initial act of creation. One does not automatically engender the other. I think the Occam’s Razor would dictate that abiogenesis, based on our current knowledge of organic chemistry, is a more probable hypothesis than creation, given that it generates the same result with fewer epistemic elements, but who knows? I certainly don’t presume to.

        5. thanks to kenneth for his lucid and patient posts. i especially notice from his last paragraph that he exemplifies the scientific approach of not claiming more than you can know for sure, a quality absent from creationist argument.

        6. The only problem is that creationism and God were not part of any of my posts originally and were brought up by the two advocates of evolution who seem to be the ones that believe evolution is like some sort of irrefutable religious dogma.

          My point here has always been that the government should not dictate the curriculum and thats all. Government has ruined our schools, a fact that few would dispute.

          Talk as “academically” as you want, you have convinced me of nothing. I have not endorsed or advocated anything and your comment about “a creationist argument lacks a scientific approach” is a “strawman”.

          One thing that I do notice is the overall hostility of those who won’t even consider creationism or the existence of God as a certainty. What are you guys so angry about ? Did you ever think that you just could be wrong ? And why am I automatically wrong for not believing evolution and abiogenesis, two entirely unprovable hypotheses based upon wishful thinking ? I don’t think any of you guys were around when the earth was formed, so stop acting like you are so very certain of what probably may have happened. Its all speculation at best.

          And one more point, I do not require you to believe what I believe nor do I think the government should force us to believe anything one way or the other. No mention can be found in any of the above posts, except for Brad Smith’s, regarding this central issue on the topic of homeschooling. Again, why are you being so fanatical about something that is nothing but a hypothesis or theory depending upon who you speak with ?

        7. One thing that I do notice is the overall hostility of those who won’t even consider creationism or the existence of God as a certainty. What are you guys so angry about ? Did you ever think that you just could be wrong ? And why am I automatically wrong for not believing evolution and abiogenesis, two entirely unprovable hypotheses based upon wishful thinking?

          Evolution, to reiterate, is not based upon “wishful thinking”, but observation and evidence, from genetics, anatomy, and the fossil record. Attacking it is akin to assailing heliocentrism in the field of celestial mechanics. Abiogenesis, granted, is conjecture at this time, but it is ultimately testable with evidence about the chemical environs of the early Earth. Frankly, you lack a firm handle on both methodlogy and evolution and you misuse basic scientific terminology. Not only this, but you also give no evidence of having read or comprehended the arguments put endlessly reciting the selfsame nostrums I demolished without any qualification or defense. My animus is not toward religion or the idea of god, though I do not believe in either, but toward the fact that you don’t know what you’re talking about and your utter hypocrisy in epistemic matters. You decry our alleged “dogmatism” and “certitude” while proclaiming yourself an adherent of Christianity, a belief system that claims a monopoly on cosmic truth. Had you any self-awareness at all, you’d be contemplating the parable of the mote and the plank.

          I don’t think any of you guys were around when the earth was formed, so stop acting like you are so very certain of what probably may have happened. Its all speculation at best.

          No direct observation is required to infer the origins of something, which can be discerned from a combination of evidence and knowledge of physical laws. I can, for instance, readily deduce that craters result from asteroid impacts on the basis of some basic knowledge of astronomy and accumulated obversations from other sources, despite never having witnessed one myself. It’s exactly this kind of bastard empiricism that actuates my hostility, not your religious beliefs.

        8. And parenthetically, I concur that the State should not interfere with individuals’ beliefs because, as an anarcho-syndicalist, I believe the State should not exist. That, however, is not an excuse or ethical license for ignorance or intellectual dishonesty.

        9. Stop wasting your energy on trying to prove your intellectual superiority as you have demonstrated nothing to me other than the fact that you are condescending and close minded.

          And talk about intellectual dishonesty ? You could teach a class on it as you continue to be adversarial and are so very sure of yourself on a subject that is far from being an exact science.

          And your last comment, while also condescending and adversarial was about the only partially sensible and topical thing you have stated since this thread began.

          “A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion”

        10. Who is wasting energy here? You have said absolutely nothing to demonstrate that I am wrong, condescending, adversial, close-minded, or off base on biology, despite your insistence that you have the relevant credentials and understanding. Your posts, thus far, consist of little more than repetition. Biology may not be as numerically precise in its predictions as physics or chemistry, but it is a field of study that deals with law-governed phenomenon. In what way biology is “inexact” you abstain from saying, possibly because the verbiage issuing from you is so much hot air. By any standard of reason, this is far more suggestive of a lack of intellectual receptivity than my lengthy and measured explications. My “certainty” extends as far as my knowledge of the subject which is not terribly distant from the mean.

          “A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”

          You furnish nothing to “understand”, save a few baseless homilies which I can deconstruct in my sleep, and your periodic entries, being entirely unsubstantiated, are comprised exclusively of opinion. There is far more justice in applying this maxim to yourself than making supercilious remarks about my alleged polemical vices.

        11. Ok Kenny, you are obviously a genius. When you get up in the morning, make sure that you tell yourself that and also make yourself a tee-shirt that says, “I am a genius” and take a photo of yourself in it for good measure.

          You do not respect anyone’s opinion except your own and believe me, you aren’t that wise or smart either. Again, you haven’t convinced me of anything except that you have an overinflated ego and a decent command of the English vocabulary which you hide behind because you really don’t know what you are talking about.

          You are no expert or authority here but never at a loss to give your opinion. You should go into politics or professional wrestling.

        12. The question of intellect is quite irrelevant here. I have made no grand claims about mine. I have asked you to elaborate upon your statements. You steadfastly decline the cup:

          You do not respect anyone’s opinion except your own and believe me, you aren’t that wise or smart either. Again, you haven’t convinced me of anything except that you have an overinflated ego and a decent command of the English vocabulary which you hide behind because you really don’t know what you are talking about.

          On what basis do you make such an assessment? What am I misinformed about? What in my writing connotes egotism? These are queries which for one or another reason you won’t answer. I deem your case to be without merit and your grasp of select ideas to be tenuous, and clearly delineate my reasons for believing as such. I submit, sir, that your continuing and groundless calumny and your insults pertaining to the question of intelligence hint at an acute sense of intellectual inadequacy which you feel compelled to rectify by denigrating me and projecting the aspects of yourself that you most despise outward.

          I respect opinions than can legitimately be called such. The notion than evolution is based upon “wishful thinking” is not opinion; is is consummate, demonstrable falsehood which is utterly indefensible in this day and age. What is written above is not opinion but objective fact. You have slandered me, accused me of intellectual high crimes, misrepresented me, and used heated accusations of mental and moral deficiency to disguise the fact that you have no cogent reply to my argument. The chips are down, chief: either put up or shut up.

  22. where did god come from? is he alive? he has no dna and doesn’t reproduce, right?

    more importantly, what have you been up to since “life goes on” went off the air?

    1. I really don’t understand your comments and I haven’t brought God into this discussion. You did.

  23. The rest of my comment somehow got cut off.

    My original intent was to discuss the rights of individuals to have the freedom to believe what they want to believe and not be required by some government school to accept things just because they say so. I had no intention of debating the existence of God vs. evolution but only the rights of all Americans to not have things shoved down their throats. I was using the theory of evolution as an example of something that not all of us accept or believe. Why should anyone have to go to a school and listen to only one side of the debate ? I would also not expect for an aetheist or agnostic to be forced to sit thru and accept a course on creationism sponsored by the government either. All theories should be discussed and individuals have the right to choose.
    Thats all.

    1. I got it Corkey. At best evolution is a theory. but that’s not the point is it? It’s amazing how people can get it that the government lies about everything. If the State says the answer is A I tend to think it’s B until given evidence to the contrary. Evolution and to a large extent global warming or now better known as Dramatic Climate Change are expected to be taken for granted no matter how little evidence is actually given. If the State is pushing it you better get with the adjenda or get labled a kook. You might even be considered mentaly insane if you don’t believe it and teach your children as well.

      For a great read about how fear runs rampant over facts check out, Michael Crichton’s State of Fear. It does a great job of pointing out how many varied interests come together to scare people into believing falshoods. Although the plot is fictional the facts are well documented, Dramatic Climate Change caused by humans is a scam!

      Peace!

  24. As an anti-war homeschooling dad, I does boggle my mind that other homeschooling parents would want to feed their children to the war machine. And yet, in the homeschooling group I was part of when we lived in California, I found parents with all manner of political views, some of which were very right-wing and saw military service as a positive and honorable activity. Some of these rejected public schools on religious grounds, others regarded the school system as incompetent but would not or could not make the connection between socialist schools and the state in general, or believed that the military was “different” somehow.

    After all, the military has chaplains; the government schools don’t.

    Bottom line is, it takes all kinds to make a homeschooling movement.

  25. It’s amazing how people who have never homeschooled — or even taught his or her children at home — are so knowledgeable of homeschooling.

    It’s equally amazing how so many homeschoolers are ignorant of the effects of man-made religion on kids.

    There’s little difference between politics or government and religion.

    I’m a homeschool parent, successful entrepreneur and religious reject.

    In my limited experience with regards homeschooling (15+ years) — there is an obvious difference between a homeschooled kid and public schooled kid when it comes to respect, aptitude and a zest for life — hands down.

  26. Speaking of Chelsea Clinton:

    There is bad news about her father.

    It is opined that Bill Clinton committed racist hate crimes, and I am not free to say anything further about it.

    Respectfully Submitted by Andrew Y. Wang, J.D. Candidate
    B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
    Messiah College, Grantham, PA
    Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993

    (I can type 90 words per minute, and there are probably thousands of copies on the Internet indicating the content of this post. Moreover, there are innumerable copies in very many countries around the world.)
    _________________
    “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Off the top of my head—it came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.

  27. I found this post while seeking other homeschooling parents whose teens have chosen to join the military and felt compelled to comment. This posting is pretty generalized and does not represent all homeschooling families.

    We're not any form of Christian (or raising Christian Warriors or whatever), nor are we lacking in education/have low IQs or live out in the boonies someplace where the nearest neighbor is at least a mile away. We just feel it's important young adults make their own way through life, even if that path is radically different from their parents. Once a child has become an adult, all any parent can *really* do is hope that chosen path is positive in some way.

    I'll be the first to say I would be an idiot if I wasn't frightened to death about my son enlisting later this year! However, I fully respect his right to free will, I have been working my tail off on helping him boost his ASVAB score in the hopes he won't be on the front line. What am I supposed to do? Disown him? Write him out of the will? Guilt trip him? How would any of that induce a sense of worth?

    Thank you.

  28. Thank you for this eye-opening post, Mr. Vance. It only goes to show how sadly even the persons who do not believe that public education is "right" for their children still have bought into the other perversions of the U. S. government.

  29. J'ai pensé qu'il allait y avoir une certaine message ennuyeux, mais c'est vraiment compensé pour mon temps. Je vais poster un lien vers cette page sur mon blog. Je suis sûr que mes visiteurs se trouve que c'est très utile.

  30. Véritablement absorbante. Je tiens à sans doute à mieux comprendre ce sujet. Quelqu'unavez des trucs et astuces, où je pourrais obtenir quelques ressources supplémentaires?L'apprécier.

  31. My recruiter doesn't really know what to do with me. I was homeschooled through high-school and I did not follow an accredited program, my Mother provided the curriculum. My Mother is not a certified teacher, though she taught mentally retarded children at a high-school for years.

    homeschooling curriculum, private homeschool program, online homeschooling

    From what I've read, I should be able to join. The lack of accreditation has bothered my recruiter and this has become very frustrating. I scored a 77 on the AFQT and I know I'm more intelligent and athletic than the vast majority of potential recruits. Anyone have any advice? I DID NOT drop out of high-school, but my curriculum was not part of an accredited program. I thought the military took homeschoolers, HR.3616 section 571 says I'm eligible, but I don't know what to say to my recruiter. Should I try another recruiter? Any recruiters out there with advice? I'm desperate for help, I've wanted to be a Marine since I was a child. It's either this or Detroit PD. Thanks.

Comments are closed.