That's it! I recognize the clip art and comic sans. XD Thank you all!

That's not it. The other one felt a lot more 'fun' and designed to appeal to the child, but that honestly looks really good. I'd prefer something not Christian, but I could work with that. I could probably whip up a program myself but with family upheavals and such, I really need a program to stay accountable too. Thank you so much for that rec! It's definitely a contender. 🙂

I used to post here years ago, but my older kids are grown and my youngest was going to school. We've decided to pull our youngest for a few weeks at least due to a local surge in covid (we have a family member going through chemo with a terminal illness and don't want to risk the time we have left with him) so I'm pulling out all my old resources. One thing I can NOT find, either on my CDs containing the mountains of curriculum I bought years ago or online, is a nice imitation writing program I used to have. It may have had 'classic' or classical' in the title but I'm not sure. It definitely wasn't part of one of the bigger programs and wasn't as formal as something like CW Aesop. I remember we'd read a fable, the child would retell it (par for the course, I know), and one of the activities was literally cutting up the sections of the story and letting the child put them back in the right order. There was some clip art in it. It's probably not exactly what I want for my fourth grader but I wanted to take a look at it. Failing that, I'd love a program that's a good intro to imitation writing. Nothing to expensive or involved. If it's light, I'm fine as I can flesh it out on my own. I'll be using Rex Barks so no grammar is needed. Thanks!

I'm sorry Rosie.

Any IB Theory of Knowledge text. The more my daughter and I explore this the more I can't believe this isn't something most Classical homeschoolers use. We talk about critical thinking, philosophy, teach logic and rhetoric and yet the big kahuna, the umbrella over those things barely gets a mention here.

It's sort of funny because it's often a toss up as to exactly what he's most famous for here: that he's an actor, he's Donald Sutherland's son, or that he's Tommy Douglas' grandson. Poor guy. :-)

Just an aside, the man who we Canadians credit for starting health care was Tommy Douglas, a Baptist minister.

I apologize. I did not intend it that way. It was awkwardly worded and then further mangling by my Swype keyboard made it seem worse. I should have learned by now that posting from my phone is a bad idea. My first paragraph was in response to you, The "small-minded and self-congratulatory" comments were meant for those the OP mentioned in her first paragraph. I don't think saying there's a moral element to the choice to quit is small-minded, I think the judgement experienced by the OP are. There may be a moral element to the choice to smoke/quit smoking for some (I'm not sure I'd allow that that is always the case) but to judge people because they smoke or because they're fat or have cancer or asthma...That's when someone goes into the territory of small-mindedness. I don't think that's what you're doing.

My apologies for contributing to the derail, Lexi.

What about an online course? Maybe he needs to have his assumptions about what is fine challenged by someone other then his mother in order for him to understand?

My husband doesn't smoke anymore but when he did he possessed the same strength of character and same set of morals as after he quit. You may ultimately be right in that it points to some small character flaw but to my mind there's no point in making a moral issue of it. It certainly small minded and self-congratulatory to assume that whether a person smokes our not tells you anything useful about their character or means they are somehow less then you by some measure as the OP relating.

dp

That is in fact how the Queen is already known in Canada. We beat you guys to that one!

That's awesome. :D And it reminds me of an EFM meeting... This was a few years back. Our group was led by my male minister and had, I think, only one other guy at the time. There were several ministers taking the course and then we had the Bishop of our diocese visit us this one day. This was the day where all of my ideas about ministers and bishops being somehow apart from and above regular folks got exploded real good. We did theological reflection. Someone told a story, we explored thoughts and feelings, came up with a metaphor. The metaphor was passing a woman your sweater to wear around her waist when you notice she's having her period and, er, leaking. Lay people, ministers and bishop all thoroughly explored the metaphor. The guys got a very in depth education that day about all things related to menstration. And we came out of it finding a piece of scripture that spoke to that metaphor. My minister maintains that theology tends to get a lot earthier when there's a majority of women, Bishop, minister or whatever. :) So we discussed having our periods with our bishop and did some excellent theological work because of it. I think that's an awesome argument for ordaining women right there. :D

It is overly simplified and I am biased. My sympathy is limited for those who choose to break the communion and then also want to take church property with them. The amount of money spent in litigation is, to me, pretty easy to understand. It should be clear to those congregations considering leaving the communion that they can't take CoE property with them. It could be debated here. It need someone on the other side of the fence though since, as you pointed out, I'm not presenting a fair and balanced view. I'm pretty biased. ETA: No, let's not debate it here. There's enough info on the internet for any that are curious. And it would seriously cramp my style in this thread. :D Besides, I might not win the debate and THAT can not be allowed to happen.