New curriculum

[beaners]

This. The bolded. Does anyone know if Ron Paul has actually come out and said that this is his curriculum? Outside of the articles on the website that are supposedly written by him but sound like they were written by Gary North?

 

 

I was at his talk Saturday at the Cincinnati Convention. He did say that it was something he was working on with North and Woods. I'm having a bit of trouble figuring out where it fits with the rest of the persona he presents.

[LucyStoner]

I read the rebuttal, full of awkward name dropping and that very strangely worded von Mises analogy, and don't find it compelling. He barely addresses the eye brow raising chilling North quotes from the post he is trying to refute. The author states that when it comes to history and economics, he'd trust North more than anyone else as a teacher. Really? There's a whole slew of living kickass libertarian Chicago and/or neoAustrian school economists out there who live and die by von Mises and FA Hayek and you're gonna go with Gary North? His creditability is shot right there. It is the antithesis of libertarianism to enforce religious and personal choices.

 

Also, I learned a new word. Paleolibertarian? Seems like a complicated way of saying "early libertarian".

[momma2three]

Also, I learned a new word. Paleolibertarian? Seems like a complicated way of saying "early libertarian".

 

 

A libertarian who eats a lot of rare steaks?

[Haiku]

I'm not a libertarian ... far from it ... But I think Ron Paul is interesting so I checked out the site. The FAQ was enough to turn me off completely, as was the the smug attitude that guarantees kids can graduate college at 18 if only ... if only they use this curriculum and just work hard.

 

Anyone who claims to have an easy answer doesn't, ime.

 

Tara

[SarahW]

A libertarian who eats a lot of rare steaks?

 

A good chunk of paleo's are libertarian. A good chunk of those are unschoolers who want to drink raw milk. So maybe. :confused1:

 

:rofl:

[Mergath]

I'm not a libertarian ... far from it ... But I think Ron Paul is interesting so I checked out the site. The FAQ was enough to turn me off completely, as was the the smug attitude that guarantees kids can graduate college at 18 if only ... if only they use this curriculum and just work hard.

 

Anyone who claims to have an easy answer doesn't, ime.

 

Tara

 

That FAQ was truly horrifying. I feel bad for any kids with undiagnosed special needs that get stuck using this curriculum. I wonder if Gary North will recommend dropping the kid from the homeschool since they obviously can't hack it, or stoning them for their continued "disobedience"? :glare:

 

And in case that didn't make it clear, I'd like to reiterate that this guy sounds like a monster, and anyone who advocates for the murder of children should not be writing homeschool curricula.

[momma2three]

And in case that didn't make it clear, I'd like to reiterate that this guy sounds like a monster, and anyone who advocates for the murder of children should not be writing homeschool curricula.

 

 

It's hard to believe that this even needs to be said, and yet apparently it does.

 

What a scary dude. And I can't believe how many people are probably going to give this guy money, based on nothing more than the fact that he attached the name of a politician/celebrity they like to it.

[Parrothead]

Would someone be kind enough to link the FAQ. I couldn't find it.

 

Okay, NM. I found them. Wow. Sounds quite Lord of the Flies - ish. Or the blind leading the blind.

[dmmm]

Well since Fox News has an article stating that Ron Paul is the brain behind this curriculum. It has to be true if they printed it, right?

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/08/ron-paul-starts-libertarian-minded-money-back-guaranteed-home-school-program/

 

It seems as though there are more paleoconcervatists involved.

[Julie of KY]

Could someone link the FAQ. I'm also hvaing trouble finding them.

Thanks.

[Scuff]

I would be interested to hear other opinions. I cannot tell much from the website. It seems too pricey for me (250/child/year and 50/course) so basically 450-500 per year per child with no books to pass on. In K-5 the courses are free, the enrollment is still 250.

 

 

That's what struck me. DH was teasing that I had just spent all our hs money, when we could have gotten this "dirt cheap" curriculum. Then I looked up hoe much it cost. RP and I have different ideas about what is considered "dirt cheap".

[Embassy]

I noticed that the website stated that colleges considering applicants only look at test scores and grades and don't have time to look at anything else. Also, it was stated that a student using this curriculum may be able to CLEP the first 2 years of college. While I'm not involved in this process now, it seems quite short-sighted. Am I wrong?

[Embassy]

That's what struck me. DH was teasing that I had just spent all our hs money, when we could have gotten this "dirt cheap" curriculum. Then I looked up hoe much it cost. RP and I have different ideas about what is considered "dirt cheap".

 

I agree. It is very expensive for what you get.

[Scuff]

It's been said a few times that North advocates killing children. Could someone link what this is talking about? That's quite an accusation, I'd like to see what you all are talking about.

[justasque]

I noticed that the website stated that colleges considering applicants only look at test scores and grades and don't have time to look at anything else. Also, it was stated that a student using this curriculum may be able to CLEP the first 2 years of college. While I'm not involved in this process now, it seems quite short-sighted. Am I wrong?

 

You're right. One goal of a high school education is to be able to get into the college of your choice. However, a more primary and important goal is to actually gain an education in the subjects you are studying. Both content knowledge and skills are part of that. While CLEP tests may be useful, a multiple-choice test is hardly the measure of a good high school education. I also don't understand the praise of CLEP juxtaposed with the negativity about SAT and ACT tests. In addition, while some colleges focus on test scores and grades in their admittance process (and other schools let in anyone who can pay the tuition), more competitive colleges may very well want more details from homeschooled applicants than a list of CLEP exams. (And more competitive colleges won't accept or be impressed by the CLEP tests either.)

 

Quoted in a previous post: "Only rarely does classroom education matter much for intellectual reasons. Therefore, a wise student spends as little money as possible of formal education, and as little time as possible."

 

As someone with a STEM degree, the idea that formal education really doesn't matter much is shocking.

[momma2three]

Of that a classroom education doesn't matter for intellectual reasons. A classroom experience with people of relatively equal intelligence and preparation, being run by an expert who knows how to draw out the highest quality conversation, can be the most intellectually stimulating thing in the world. I don't know what they'll do before then, but I hope my kids have that experience in college (and probably high school), and if they choose to go to grad school I certainly hope that they'll have such an experience there.

[5LittleMonkeys]

It's been said a few times that North advocates killing children. Could someone link what this is talking about? That's quite an accusation, I'd like to see what you all are talking about.

 

I was reading this earlier today. I haven't had time to see if the quoted material has been taken out of context yet...maybe someone else could verify.

 

I've gotta say that even if some of this stuff was taken out of context, I've read enough about him to know that this guy is nuts. It makes me sick to my stomach to think anyone might associate homeschooling with him in any way.

[happymomofboys]

It's been said a few times that North advocates killing children. Could someone link what this is talking about? That's quite an accusation, I'd like to see what you all are talking about.

 

The relevant quote can be found here. However, if that is not enough context, you're welcome to read all 450 pages yourself.

 

ETA: After skimming the PDF file, it appears he revised the chapter in question and in the process removed the above quote. Found a copy of the original (warning: links to PDF)

[mommymilkies]

 

 

The relevant quote can be found here. However, if that is not enough context, you're welcome to read all 450 pages yourself.

 

ETA: After skimming the PDF file, it appears he revised the chapter in question and in the process removed the above quote. Found a copy of the original (warning: links to PDF)

 

Wow. Just...wow. People are ok with this trash?????

[Farrar]

I wouldn't let anyone who thinks kids who curse their parents should be put to death near my kids, much less create their curriculum.

 

This stuff gives Christians and libertarians a bad name.

[5LittleMonkeys]

 

 

This stuff gives Christians and libertarians a bad name.

 

This stuff gives human beings a bad name.

[Ecclecticmum]

So let me get this right...

To go would be:

*Homosexuals

*Blasphemers

*Heretics

*SN Children (because those who have SN children know sometimes they lash out or mimic words they hear)

*People who hit their thumb instead of a nail (because that becomes colorful language)

* Women who are raped (who were chaste and weren't betrothed.)

*Teens & kids who have had a bad home life/teens who need help

 

1. There would be hardly anyone left, and those who were would be more like automatons, all thinking the same.

 

2. Isn't there somewhere that preaches forgiveness and judge not?

 

3. To me, as long as a person isn't deliberatly hurting another person, people should have the freedom to live their life the way they want. You wouldn't want someone telling you how to live your life, so in return we shouldn't tell others. I think diversity makes life interesting. If every was the same in thinking, many accomplishments wouldn't of been made.

 

Heres a quote for that:

 

“Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.â€

 

 

4. I honestly am super worried. To create a peaceful world, it has to start with the children, and the children learning acceptance of all. Having a curriculum backed by someone who may believe this is downright scary. People always talk about the hidden/underlying religions in secular curriculums, and that they won't use the products because of the fact that these companies could be subliminly (sp? rofl, must look that up) adding indoctrinate into their childrens education. Well if someone who believes the above must happen is behind creating the curriculum, what sort of biased material may be entered in a way that the parent doesn't figure it out till later? This is supposedly a self-taught curriculum (it looks to me something like Robinson curriculum turned political, and more vague) so the child could be reading the material without the mother realizing the stuff contained within it is political or moral propaganda.

 

It may be a fine curricula, but the whole vague-ness of the site, plus the FAQs, plus what I have read around the net is a little weird. If I wanted something like that I would go with the Robinson Curriculum. Then again, I am not liberal (or any agenda in political circles at all) so may be I am missing a giant chunk of greatness that flies over my head because of that.

 

I would just say to anyone wanting to try this curricula, to research it thorough, and also research both North & Paul, plus all of the teachers involved in the area your doing, to make sure their views agree with yours. I would also suggest no matter how self-teaching it is, to go over the courses/products with a fine-tooth comb, pre-read everything to make sure its fine for your children to read & use. Better to spend a bit of extra time doing that, than to find out something that diagrees with your views afterwards.

 

xxx

[AimeeM]

I agree wholeheartedly.

As a libertarian, I firmly believe the following (which is nothing like proposed in this new "curriculum"):

"In order for an act to be a crime, there must be a victim; anything that is peaceful, voluntary, and honest should be tolerated, regardless of whether you agree with it. Part of the cost of freedom is allowing others to be free."

 

My almost 4 year old very often repeats what I say... and often (because I'm clumsy) those words are er... colorful, lol. I suppose he should be stoned to death for it...

 

The "curriculum" is disgusting and I hate that it has a "libertarian" stamp.

So let me get this right...

To go would be:

*Homosexuals

*Blasphemers

*Heretics

*SN Children (because those who have SN children know sometimes they lash out or mimic words they hear)

*People who hit their thumb instead of a nail (because that becomes colorful language)

* Women who are raped (who were chaste and weren't betrothed.)

*Teens & kids who have had a bad home life/teens who need help

 

1. There would be hardly anyone left, and those who were would be more like automatons, all thinking the same.

 

2. Isn't there somewhere that preaches forgiveness and judge not?

 

3. To me, as long as a person isn't deliberatly hurting another person, people should have the freedom to live their life the way they want. You wouldn't want someone telling you how to live your life, so in return we shouldn't tell others. I think diversity makes life interesting. If every was the same in thinking, many accomplishments wouldn't of been made.

 

Heres a quote for that:

 

“Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.â€

 

 

4. I honestly am super worried. To create a peaceful world, it has to start with the children, and the children learning acceptance of all. Having a curriculum backed by someone who may believe this is downright scary. People always talk about the hidden/underlying religions in secular curriculums, and that they won't use the products because of the fact that these companies could be subliminly (sp? rofl, must look that up) adding indoctrinate into their childrens education. Well if someone who believes the above must happen is behind creating the curriculum, what sort of biased material may be entered in a way that the parent doesn't figure it out till later? This is supposedly a self-taught curriculum (it looks to me something like Robinson curriculum turned political, and more vague) so the child could be reading the material without the mother realizing the stuff contained within it is political or moral propaganda.

 

It may be a fine curricula, but the whole vague-ness of the site, plus the FAQs, plus what I have read around the net is a little weird. If I wanted something like that I would go with the Robinson Curriculum. Then again, I am not liberal (or any agenda in political circles at all) so may be I am missing a giant chunk of greatness that flies over my head because of that.

 

I would just say to anyone wanting to try this curricula, to research it thorough, and also research both North & Paul, plus all of the teachers involved in the area your doing, to make sure their views agree with yours. I would also suggest no matter how self-teaching it is, to go over the courses/products with a fine-tooth comb, pre-read everything to make sure its fine for your children to read & use. Better to spend a bit of extra time doing that, than to find out something that diagrees with your views afterwards.

 

xxx

 

[Mergath]

I wouldn't let anyone who thinks kids who curse their parents should be put to death near my kids, much less create their curriculum.

 

This stuff gives Christians and libertarians a bad name.

 

 

The worst part of that excerpt is that he moves on so quickly. "Yes, of course children who curse should be killed! Moving on..." It's like the idea is hardly a blip on his radar.

[SarahW]

The worst part of that excerpt is that he moves on so quickly. "Yes, of course children who curse should be killed! Moving on..." It's like the idea is hardly a blip on his radar.

 

Wait, wait. I don't want to read 400 pages of tripe, but does he really equate the OT law about cursing one's parents with a kid who sometimes says sh*t???

[HSinNH]

"In order for an act to be a crime, there must be a victim; anything that is peaceful, voluntary, and honest should be tolerated, regardless of whether you agree with it. Part of the cost of freedom is allowing others to be free."

 

 

:iagree:

[Mergath]

 

Wait, wait. I don't want to read 400 pages of tripe, but does he really equate the OT law about cursing one's parents with a kid who sometimes says sh*t???

 

 

The link up-post links to only a page of text with the relevant quote. From the way he uses the word "curse" in the quote as a whole, that was the impression I got. Regardless of how a child curses his parents, however, I can't see a way where the child would deserve death.

[SarahW]

The link up-post links to only a page of text with the relevant quote. From the way he uses the word "curse" in the quote as a whole, that was the impression I got. Regardless of how a child curses his parents, however, I can't see a way where the child would deserve death.

 

Ugh, I did a ctrl+f through the pdf, and I don't know. He does say "A curse is a threat: calling the wrath of God down upon someone." But then he goes on to talk about obscenity and how that should also be punished. So I don't really know what he is saying. I don't know what anything he says in the pdf actually means, really. :glare:

 

And, fwiw, I don't think the verse in question is talking about children as in minors. Sandwiched between it and another "mother and father" verse is a verse calling for the capital punishment of slave traders, and I don't think many children were engaged in that activity. In that society extended families lived together and were supposed to take care of their elderly parents in their home. And curses and oaths were taken very seriously, and in most societies it was deemed unseemly to make an oath or a curse on anything but your own head. Making a curse on your parent's head would have been considered a rather nasty thing to do in most ancient societies And....that's my ancient history lesson of the day. :)

[Mergath]

 

Ugh, I did a ctrl+f through the pdf, and I don't know. He does say "A curse is a threat: calling the wrath of God down upon someone." But then he goes on to talk about obscenity and how that should also be punished. So I don't really know what he is saying. I don't know what anything he says in the pdf actually means, really. :glare:

 

And, fwiw, I don't think the verse in question is talking about children as in minors. Sandwiched between it and another "mother and father" verse is a verse calling for the capital punishment of slave traders, and I don't think many children were engaged in that activity. In that society extended families lived together and were supposed to take care of their elderly parents in their home. And curses and oaths were taken very seriously, and in most societies it was deemed unseemly to make an oath or a curse on anything but your own head. Making a curse on your parent's head would have been considered a rather nasty thing to do in most ancient societies And....that's my ancient history lesson of the day. :)

 

I know many of the bible verses can get confusing about who is being referred to, and I haven't studied the one in question so I don't know much about it. North certainly seems to be comfortable with the idea of imposing capital punishment on children, though. And even if a kid does "call the wrath of God down upon someone," I can't fathom stoning them to death, like North advocates. Either way, the guy's nuttier than squirrel poo.

[Guest CaseyS]

Everybody needs to calm down here. This is Ron Paul's curriculum. He will not be "distancing" himself from it. Gary North has been his research assistant for many years, so it makes perfect sense for him to be involved. The great Tom Woods is a very close, personal friend of Ron Paul's. He, too, has a heavy influence on the curriculum and will be teaching many of the courses.

 

We plan to use this curriculum for our son. The ONLY amount I have paid thus far is $25 to have access to the forums. Curriculum will be available to preview in mid-May. The cost, IMHO, is very reasonable when compared to other curricula.

 

If you are not libertarian minded, this curriculum is not for you. It's that simple. Move along and, please, quit talking about these people like they are scam artists. Ron Paul is passionate about this country and its future. He believes homeschooling is an integral part of moving our country in the right direction.

 

Lew Rockwell wrote this on his blog last Friday:

 

Despite what the Guardian claims, Ron is no religious right-winger. His non-denominational Protestant faith is tolerant and humble. It's true that Ron employs the brilliant Gary North; he also employs the brilliant Tom Woods; both will help him with his homeschool curriculum. But Ron is neither a Calvinist nor a Catholic, and he is in charge of the content and everything else. And as Ron said yesterday in a conference call, he wants a curriculum that--while recognizing the importance of religion, as the non-religious Murray Rothbard did--is not "Christian."

"I want all parents concerned about getting, a high-quality, low-price, rigorous, parent-controlled, pro-liberty education for their children to be able to use this curriculum, whether they are atheist libertarians or evangelicals or anyone else," he said. Gary North's religious views are not Ron Paul's, and neither are Tom Woods's. But Ron works happily with both these scholars on shared liberty projects. "Freedom brings people together," as he has often noted.

[mommymilkies]

No offense, CaseyS, but this is your first post and it reads like an advertisement. ;)

[Guest CaseyS]

My friend alerted me to this conversation, and I felt compelled to comment. The things being said are unfair and, largely, unfounded. Homeschoolers should be rejoicing over the fact that Ron Paul is so passionate about homeschooling! He is currently writing a book on homeschooling and even spoke at the Cincinnati Homeschool Convention. It saddens me to see him under attack. If my words come across as an advertisement or endorsement...well...guilty as charged, I guess.

[Spy Car]

Everybody needs to calm down here. This is Ron Paul's curriculum. He will not be "distancing" himself from it. Gary North has been his research assistant for many years, so it makes perfect sense for him to be involved. The great Tom Woods is a very close, personal friend of Ron Paul's. He, too, has a heavy influence on the curriculum and will be teaching many of the courses.

 

We plan to use this curriculum for our son. The ONLY amount I have paid thus far is $25 to have access to the forums. Curriculum will be available to preview in mid-May. The cost, IMHO, is very reasonable when compared to other curricula.

 

If you are not libertarian minded, this curriculum is not for you. It's that simple. Move along and, please, quit talking about these people like they are scam artists. Ron Paul is passionate about this country and its future. He believes homeschooling is an integral part of moving our country in the right direction.

 

Lew Rockwell wrote this on his blog last Friday:

 

Despite what the Guardian claims, Ron is no religious right-winger. His non-denominational Protestant faith is tolerant and humble. It's true that Ron employs the brilliant Gary North; he also employs the brilliant Tom Woods; both will help him with his homeschool curriculum. But Ron is neither a Calvinist nor a Catholic, and he is in charge of the content and everything else. And as Ron said yesterday in a conference call, he wants a curriculum that--while recognizing the importance of religion, as the non-religious Murray Rothbard did--is not "Christian."

"I want all parents concerned about getting, a high-quality, low-price, rigorous, parent-controlled, pro-liberty education for their children to be able to use this curriculum, whether they are atheist libertarians or evangelicals or anyone else," he said. Gary North's religious views are not Ron Paul's, and neither are Tom Woods's. But Ron works happily with both these scholars on shared liberty projects. "Freedom brings people together," as he has often noted.

 

Ron Paul had his name on newsletters that went out on his masthead that contained reprehensible racism and bigotry. Paul later "distanced" himself from the writings in his own newsletter, incrediously claiming he didn't know anything about it, even though the articles were published over an extended period of time.

 

The man widely reported to be the author of those racist articles is the very same Lew Rockwell whose blog post is defending Gary North and Ron Paul.

 

I don't buy it.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

My friend alerted me to this conversation, and I felt compelled to comment. The things being said are unfair and, largely, unfounded. Homeschoolers should be rejoicing over the fact that Ron Paul is so passionate about homeschooling! He is currently writing a book on homeschooling and even spoke at the Cincinnati Homeschool Convention. It saddens me to see him under attack. If my words come across as an advertisement or endorsement...well...guilty as charged, I guess.

 

I think that homeschoolers should (and evidently do) feel embarrassed and angry to have wing-nuts like Gary North, Lew Rockwell, and Ron Paul drag down the option of home education in the public estimation.

 

Guys like this do great harm.

 

Bill

[beaners]

Casey, can I ask you a few questions? I like Ron Paul, but I'm mildly skeptical about the curriculum as it has been presented at this point.

 

One, how old is your son? You said you like the cost compared to other programs. I'm curious what levels you are comparing to. Are you currently homeschooling, or were you already planning to homeschool in the future, or will you be homeschooling because of this program?

 

Two, what exactly is being discussed on the forums with the curriculum in its current state? From what I've read so far, it looks like that will be the only source for discussing how to use the program. Is it "Yay Ron Paul!" (which doesn't bother me, since I do like the guy), or is it discussing the curriculum? I can't justify the price to read a forum, but I am curious about the discussion there.

[elegantlion]

Everybody needs to calm down here.

 

 

:rolleyes: Welcome to the discussion boards. Some of us like to know about the people behind, involved, writing the curriculum we use. As to the blog post, I wouldn't use "brilliant" and "Gary North" in the same sentence.

[Guest CaseyS]

The newsletter issue is getting very old. That was addressed MANY times while RP was campaigning (and, btw, it was the only "dirt" they could find on the guy). He has proven many times over that he is not racist. Have you seen how diverse his following is?

 

What is the worst that could happen here? That we have a bunch of freedom-loving, fiscally responsible youth running around? Perish the thought!

 

As for the forums, right now a lot of people have questions about the curriculum, when certain grades will be ready, things like that. As of right now, grades 6-10 will be ready to go on September 2nd. They expect the full K-12 curriculum will be in place by fall 2015.

 

I have homeschooled for six years. My son will be in 6th grade. He LOVES economics and history so this should be a great fit.

[AimeeM]

I am a Libertarian and wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole - and will be advising my like minded (libertarian) friends to do the same. Any man who proposes stoning children and homosexuals is a NUT... a dangerous nut.

Everybody needs to calm down here. This is Ron Paul's curriculum. He will not be "distancing" himself from it. Gary North has been his research assistant for many years, so it makes perfect sense for him to be involved. The great Tom Woods is a very close, personal friend of Ron Paul's. He, too, has a heavy influence on the curriculum and will be teaching many of the courses.

 

We plan to use this curriculum for our son. The ONLY amount I have paid thus far is $25 to have access to the forums. Curriculum will be available to preview in mid-May. The cost, IMHO, is very reasonable when compared to other curricula.

 

If you are not libertarian minded, this curriculum is not for you. It's that simple. Move along and, please, quit talking about these people like they are scam artists. Ron Paul is passionate about this country and its future. He believes homeschooling is an integral part of moving our country in the right direction.

 

Lew Rockwell wrote this on his blog last Friday:

 

Despite what the Guardian claims, Ron is no religious right-winger. His non-denominational Protestant faith is tolerant and humble. It's true that Ron employs the brilliant Gary North; he also employs the brilliant Tom Woods; both will help him with his homeschool curriculum. But Ron is neither a Calvinist nor a Catholic, and he is in charge of the content and everything else. And as Ron said yesterday in a conference call, he wants a curriculum that--while recognizing the importance of religion, as the non-religious Murray Rothbard did--is not "Christian."

"I want all parents concerned about getting, a high-quality, low-price, rigorous, parent-controlled, pro-liberty education for their children to be able to use this curriculum, whether they are atheist libertarians or evangelicals or anyone else," he said. Gary North's religious views are not Ron Paul's, and neither are Tom Woods's. But Ron works happily with both these scholars on shared liberty projects. "Freedom brings people together," as he has often noted.

 

[Sebastian (a lady)]

My friend alerted me to this conversation, and I felt compelled to comment. The things being said are unfair and, largely, unfounded. Homeschoolers should be rejoicing over the fact that Ron Paul is so passionate about homeschooling! He is currently writing a book on homeschooling and even spoke at the Cincinnati Homeschool Convention. It saddens me to see him under attack. If my words come across as an advertisement or endorsement...well...guilty as charged, I guess.

 

 

Ron Paul did speak at the Convention in Cincinnati. But then the person from the Perfect Pickler booth had two or three presentations. Does that make the Perfect Pickler 2-3 times more authoritative on homeschooling?

 

There are lots of people who write about homeschooling. Some of them even do actual research or have experience homeschooling. Personally I'd rather buy curriculum put together by an actual homeschooler who knows good days and bad days, idealistic goals and gritty reality than something from a politition looking for the next thing to hang his name on.

 

What I find most lacking in the RP curriculum is both contact time and real expertise. The scant number of instructors can't teach more than a hundred or so students without it becoming a one way lecture. At that point I'm probably better off with Teaching Company lectures or MIT Opencourse presentations.

 

Sorry but I don't see much value in what's being offered.

[Slartibartfast]

Everybody needs to calm down here. This is Ron Paul's curriculum. He will not be "distancing" himself from it. Gary North has been his research assistant for many years, so it makes perfect sense for him to be involved. The great Tom Woods is a very close, personal friend of Ron Paul's. He, too, has a heavy influence on the curriculum and will be teaching many of the courses.

 

 

We plan to use this curriculum for our son. The ONLY amount I have paid thus far is $25 to have access to the forums. Curriculum will be available to preview in mid-May. The cost, IMHO, is very reasonable when compared to other curricula.

 

If you are not libertarian minded, this curriculum is not for you. It's that simple. Move along and, please, quit talking about these people like they are scam artists. Ron Paul is passionate about this country and its future. He believes homeschooling is an integral part of moving our country in the right direction.

 

Lew Rockwell wrote this on his blog last Friday:

 

Despite what the Guardian claims, Ron is no religious right-winger. His non-denominational Protestant faith is tolerant and humble. It's true that Ron employs the brilliant Gary North; he also employs the brilliant Tom Woods; both will help him with his homeschool curriculum. But Ron is neither a Calvinist nor a Catholic, and he is in charge of the content and everything else. And as Ron said yesterday in a conference call, he wants a curriculum that--while recognizing the importance of religion, as the non-religious Murray Rothbard did--is not "Christian."

"I want all parents concerned about getting, a high-quality, low-price, rigorous, parent-controlled, pro-liberty education for their children to be able to use this curriculum, whether they are atheist libertarians or evangelicals or anyone else," he said. Gary North's religious views are not Ron Paul's, and neither are Tom Woods's. But Ron works happily with both these scholars on shared liberty projects. "Freedom brings people together," as he has often noted.

 

 

 

 

 

Excuse me? Who are you to come in here and tell people to calm down? Many have serious concerns with politicians writing curriculum and for good reason. I am not about to allow politicians access to my child's mind.

 

Is Lew Rockwell really in a place to try and state Ron Paul *isn't* a religious right winger? Even if Ron Paul is not, the "brilliant" Gary North *is*

 

Who are you to tell us that Ron Paul is not a Calvinist and therefore "ok"? Even if Ron Paul is NOT a Calvinist, Gary North is the son-in-law of the founder of the Calvinist Christian Reconstruction movement, RJ Rushdoony. RJ Rushdoony also DENIED THE HOLOCAUST.

 

Here is a glowing Eulogy to RJ Rushdoony by Lew Rockwell.

 

http://www.lewrockwe...th/north33.html

 

Gary North quotes Rushdooney in his work.

 

Apparently they feel he is quite a role model. I wonder if victims of the Holocaust would feel the same since RJ Rushdoony referred to the deaths of six million people as "bearing false witness towards Germany." Poor Germany. :( He referred to interracial marriage as "unequal yoking" and to slavery as "benevolent."

 

From the Southern Poverty Law Center

 

The late Rousas John Rushdoony, known as the "father of Christian Reconstructionism," established the Chalcedon Foundation in 1965. The think tank's name refers to the Council of Chalcedon, which in 451 A.D. proclaimed the state's subservience to God.

Rushdoony's message, articulated in his massive 1973 opus, The Institutes of Biblical Law, is similar: fundamentalist Christians must take control of governments and impose strict biblical law on America and the world. That would mean the death penalty for "practicing homosexuals," among many other "abominators."

Rushdoony, whose book is revered by Reconstructionists as their foundational document, was also a racist. He opposed "unequal yoking" — interracial marriage or even "enforced integration" — insisting in the book that "[a]ll men are NOT created equal before God... . Moreover, an employer has a property right to prefer whom he will in terms of 'color,' creed, race or national origin."

The Bible, Rushdoony wrote, "recognizes that some people are by nature slaves." In fact, American slavery was "generally benevolent" despite misguided attempts to make whites feel guilty about it.

Rushdoony was also a Holocaust denier, attacking the "false witness" that some 6 million Jews were murdered in World War II.

In the early 1990s, Rushdoony was reportedly a member of the board of governors of the secretive Council of National Policy Board, an exclusive group of arch-conservative leaders, where he was feted on his 80th birthday by Howard Phillips (Phillips ran for president twice on the extremist Constitution Party ticket).

 

http://www.splcenter...y-army?page=0,1

 

If this is a role model for Gary North and Lew Rockwell, if this is who Ron Paul puts his faith and trust in then there is NO WAY I would allow such garbage anywhere near my kids.

 

if you want to use this expensive and likely ridiculous curriculum for your children feel free, but don't complain when the results take a serious toll on their future academic progress.

[Slartibartfast]

The newsletter issue is getting very old. That was addressed MANY times while RP was campaigning (and, btw, it was the only "dirt" they could find on the guy). He has proven many times over that he is not racist. Have you seen how diverse his following is?

 

 

Actually he never did say who wrote those articles and until he does the issue will always hound him. I bet money that the people who did still work with him. :)

 

And honestly I find it appalling someone would say something so serious was "old news."

 

http://www.csmonitor...n-Paul-has-said

 

It is telling that he was not aware of what was being printed in a newsletter with his name on it. Will he be just as unaware of the content in this curriculum? One can claim ignorance or accordance but you can't avoid both.

[Spy Car]

The newsletter issue is getting very old.

 

It is revelent because Ron Paul "distanced" himself from his own racist newsletter, something you suggested he would never do with his own "homeschool curiculmn." Ron Paul evidently farmed out the writing of the racially inflamitory articles, purportedly to Lew Rockwell although neither man has come clean about their authorship.

 

Paul either had no oversight of the content of a racist newsletter that appeared under his name, or he is lying. Why should we believe his oversight of a homeschooling program that bears his name will be any better than the newsletter?

 

Then add in the Gary North factor, a man who seriously wants to bring back stoning, and you wonder people are feeling skeptical.

 

Having Lew Rockwell writing the "defense" is just icing on the cake.

 

Bill

[Farrar]

I wondered if anyone would come in here and defend this.

 

This whole thing has really reminded me that it's important for us to call out homeschoolers who espouse hateful views, whether it's encouraging child abuse, using defamatory and offensive language about other faiths, or encouraging stoning of children in the modern era. It's really up to us to say something.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

The newsletter issue is getting very old. That was addressed MANY times while RP was campaigning (and, btw, it was the only "dirt" they could find on the guy). He has proven many times over that he is not racist. Have you seen how diverse his following is?

 

What is the worst that could happen here? That we have a bunch of freedom-loving, fiscally responsible youth running around? Perish the thought!

 

As for the forums, right now a lot of people have questions about the curriculum, when certain grades will be ready, things like that. As of right now, grades 6-10 will be ready to go on September 2nd. They expect the full K-12 curriculum will be in place by fall 2015.

 

I have homeschooled for six years. My son will be in 6th grade. He LOVES economics and history so this should be a great fit.

 

In my mind, the worst that will happen is that it will not live up to the grandious claims and will actually leave the kids with a lower quality education than if they had used curriculum that was more tried and tested and closely monitored by the parents for comprehension and retention. In homeschooling, as in many other endevours, there is opportunity cost. Time spent on Latin that cannot also be spent on geometry. Time spent studying the American Revolution cannot also be spent on Shakespeare. Time spent on economics cannot also be spent on chemistry. In this case the opportunity cost of a curriculum that is driven by ideology is that the same educational time cannot be spent on great books, solid historical education, rigorous math and science and demanding foreign language.

 

Of course anyone is free to follow the educational road they choose. But others are also free to point out potential shortcomings without being chastized.

[NASDAQ]

I am libertarian-minded (we are active conservatives). Some people would not use anything Ron Paul endorsed. I am not one of those people. I would be interested, for example, in an economics class he endorsed. I would take a look at a civics class. Fair?

 

This curriculum is half-baked. It takes on too much. Look at the way that the currently popular curricula came to be, ,so to speak:

 

Singapore Math is the combined efforts of the Singaporean education ministry, tested and tweaked over many years

 

Calvert is a school-in-the-box model but was taken from what was already working in a prestigious private school

 

Sonlight pulls together from materials other people prepared; it curates, so to speak

 

All About Learning Press started with a spelling program, distributed it to a bunch of testers, and then gradually expanded

 

Beast Academy has a small team working full time, releasing one set of books every few months or so.

 

TWTM started s a large book detailing a curriculum made up of other people's work.

 

No one shows up with an entire curriculum.

 

Everyone provides substantive samples.

 

Everyone starts from an area of strength and expands in response to interest and demand.

[happymomofboys]

Everybody needs to calm down here. This is Ron Paul's curriculum. He will not be "distancing" himself from it. Gary North has been his research assistant for many years, so it makes perfect sense for him to be involved. The great Tom Woods is a very close, personal friend of Ron Paul's. He, too, has a heavy influence on the curriculum and will be teaching many of the courses.

 

We plan to use this curriculum for our son. The ONLY amount I have paid thus far is $25 to have access to the forums. Curriculum will be available to preview in mid-May. The cost, IMHO, is very reasonable when compared to other curricula.

 

If you are not libertarian minded, this curriculum is not for you. It's that simple. Move along and, please, quit talking about these people like they are scam artists. Ron Paul is passionate about this country and its future. He believes homeschooling is an integral part of moving our country in the right direction.

 

Lew Rockwell wrote this on his blog last Friday:

 

Despite what the Guardian claims, Ron is no religious right-winger. His non-denominational Protestant faith is tolerant and humble. It's true that Ron employs the brilliant Gary North; he also employs the brilliant Tom Woods; both will help him with his homeschool curriculum. But Ron is neither a Calvinist nor a Catholic, and he is in charge of the content and everything else. And as Ron said yesterday in a conference call, he wants a curriculum that--while recognizing the importance of religion, as the non-religious Murray Rothbard did--is not "Christian."

"I want all parents concerned about getting, a high-quality, low-price, rigorous, parent-controlled, pro-liberty education for their children to be able to use this curriculum, whether they are atheist libertarians or evangelicals or anyone else," he said. Gary North's religious views are not Ron Paul's, and neither are Tom Woods's. But Ron works happily with both these scholars on shared liberty projects. "Freedom brings people together," as he has often noted.

 

I am libertarian minded and a Ron Paul supporter and this curriculum is not for me for no other reason than the fact Gary North is developing it. If this was Ron Paul's curriculum that he himself put together, then why does he need a Director of Curriculum Development? I don't buy what Lew Rockwell is selling. I don't want a theonomist dictating what my child should learn.

[*Lulu*]

Everybody needs to calm down here. This is Ron Paul's curriculum. He will not be "distancing" himself from it. Gary North has been his research assistant for many years, so it makes perfect sense for him to be involved. The great Tom Woods is a very close, personal friend of Ron Paul's. He, too, has a heavy influence on the curriculum and will be teaching many of the courses.

 

We plan to use this curriculum for our son. The ONLY amount I have paid thus far is $25 to have access to the forums. Curriculum will be available to preview in mid-May. The cost, IMHO, is very reasonable when compared to other curricula.

 

If you are not libertarian minded, this curriculum is not for you. It's that simple. Move along and, please, quit talking about these people like they are scam artists. Ron Paul is passionate about this country and its future. He believes homeschooling is an integral part of moving our country in the right direction.

 

Lew Rockwell wrote this on his blog last Friday:

 

Despite what the Guardian claims, Ron is no religious right-winger. His non-denominational Protestant faith is tolerant and humble. It's true that Ron employs the brilliant Gary North; he also employs the brilliant Tom Woods; both will help him with his homeschool curriculum. But Ron is neither a Calvinist nor a Catholic, and he is in charge of the content and everything else. And as Ron said yesterday in a conference call, he wants a curriculum that--while recognizing the importance of religion, as the non-religious Murray Rothbard did--is not "Christian."

"I want all parents concerned about getting, a high-quality, low-price, rigorous, parent-controlled, pro-liberty education for their children to be able to use this curriculum, whether they are atheist libertarians or evangelicals or anyone else," he said. Gary North's religious views are not Ron Paul's, and neither are Tom Woods's. But Ron works happily with both these scholars on shared liberty projects. "Freedom brings people together," as he has often noted.

 

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *takes deep breath and wipes tear from eye*

 

Wait, you were serious weren't you?

 

 

Okay then...........Welcome to the boards where we discuss all manner of things that may or may not be of any actual concern to us. Since, according to my mother, most of us homeschool in part because of an aversion to doing as we are told, telling us to "move along" is unlikely to result in much of anything other than irritation or amusement.

 

Personally I have this twitch that acts up whenever any politician starts talking, (maybe my mom was on to something), and an over whelming desire to run like hell when one tells me they have a vision for homeschooling. And when someone decides to become the new face of homeschooling they had better be prepared to catch flak for it; the homeschooling community is so diverse that at least one group will feel the need to point out that they are not being represented by that person's views. If the views are extra nutty, hateful, or controversial they should expect to hear about it.

 

 

ETA- and I agree with pp sentiment that we homeschoolers should be outspoken when we disagree with someone whose rhetoric is offensive to us lest we be counted in thier number.

[Guest CaseyS]

My friend warned me you were all an opinionated bunch. :)

[Farrar]

My friend warned me you were all an opinionated bunch. :)

 

 

What's interesting, Casey, at least to someone who has been here a little while, is that the people posting that we find this whole Ron Paul curriculum somewhere in between absurd and potentially offensive aren't opinionated in the same way. Some of us are liberals, some libertarians, some conservatives. Some of us are atheists, some conservative Christians. I don't really agree with a number of the people who have posted here when they speak about other topics. The thing that tends to unite people on this board is that we like to think critically and question. And this curriculum (or lack thereof thus far) doesn't really pass any level of scrutiny at this point. Every piece of evidence people have brought to the table hasn't made it look very good.

[dands]

Just like Pelosi said once " You have to pass it (buy it first) in order to know what is in it"

 

So if we pay $25 now we do not have to pay $250 in Sept?