HSLDA Alert re: HR 2343

[SabrinainPA]

I do not post often, but I am surprised to not see any posts concerning this bill that is to be voted on this weekend. I get my sense of "community" from this forum (sad for my life, I know), so please tell me I am not alone in my feelings of anger that the government wants to allow others to tell me how to raise my kids. And don't get me started on the money that is to fund this!

 

From HSLDA e-mail alert:

"Action is needed now to stop a harmful early education bill, H.R. 2343, the Education Begins at Home Act. Despite the bill’s seemingly homeschool-friendly title, the legislation is actually yet another “big government†encroachment into the sphere of education.

H.R. 2343 seeks to expand the Head Start Early Home Visitation program to supposedly “educate†parents of children from infants to 5-year-olds on parenting strategies. If passed, this bill would literally open the door for government employees to enter private homes to impose unelected officials’ educational agendas, which may prove offensive and contrary to many families’ moral and religious beliefs. Although at this point enrollment in the home visitation program is voluntary, government programs almost always grow beyond their original scope when bills are amended.

This intrusive and unnecessary legislation comes at a whopping starting cost of more than $190 million—a burden that will be incurred by already struggling American taxpayers. "

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I'm all for legislation like this. These programs can be an invaluable to women who participate. Here, they provide parents with printed information, and even provide books and developmental toys for children who may otherwise not have them. They did not have this when dd came along, but everyone I know who has participated in these program has been pleased and relieved to have someone to go to with questions and concerns about their child's development or just the peace of mind of knowing their child is doing well developmentally- not to mention the poor or uneducated moms for whom programs like this can make all the difference. My teacher friends have also seen a marked difference in underserved populations of children entering preschool and kindergarten who have had the benefit of these programs.

 

The HSLDA does not represent me or a lot of homeschoolers I know. Just because it says "homeschool" in the title doesn't mean I'm on board.

[Parrothead]

I do not post often, but I am surprised to not see any posts concerning this bill that is to be voted on this weekend. I get my sense of "community" from this forum (sad for my life, I know), so please tell me I am not alone in my feelings of anger that the government wants to allow others to tell me how to raise my kids. And don't get me started on the money that is to fund this!

 

From HSLDA e-mail alert:

"Action is needed now to stop a harmful early education bill, H.R. 2343, the Education Begins at Home Act. Despite the bill’s seemingly homeschool-friendly title, the legislation is actually yet another “big government†encroachment into the sphere of education.

H.R. 2343 seeks to expand the Head Start Early Home Visitation program to supposedly “educate†parents of children from infants to 5-year-olds on parenting strategies. If passed, this bill would literally open the door for government employees to enter private homes to impose unelected officials’ educational agendas, which may prove offensive and contrary to many families’ moral and religious beliefs. Although at this point enrollment in the home visitation program is voluntary, government programs almost always grow beyond their original scope when bills are amended.

This intrusive and unnecessary legislation comes at a whopping starting cost of more than $190 million—a burden that will be incurred by already struggling American taxpayers. "

 

$190 million that can be used for something else. I'm going to check my email for the notice and contact my representative about my displeasure of more unneeded government interference and wasteful spending.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

The problem I have with programs like this is that they can be very invasive and very hard to decline. I had pre-natal and delivery with my third kid through military medicine. At the info meeting where they laid out all the options for where you could get your pre-natal care, they had a huge stack of forms. There were the normal forms that you fill out for any military medical check up or patient enrollment.

But there was also a multi page questionaire on things like nutrition, smoking, alcohol, gun ownership, spouse relationships etc. It felt a lot like the sort of thing I would have filled out in order to report my husband as an abusive spouse. I really didn't feel that they needed to have a form like this in order to give me the pre-natal care I wanted. I asked and only then was told that it was actually optional.

There was also a program where you would get What to Expect books. But you got them during a home visit by a nurse. I already had all the books I needed so I declined that too.

Now wouldn't you know, I got that survey form again by mail, twice. I also got calls asking why I hadn't enrolled in the home visit program.

Are there families who could benefit from the help? I'm sure there are. I just resent the coersive tone that these programs seem to take on.

Plus these programs are designed to support government policies. You aren't going to hear much about risks of vaccines, delayed vaccination schedules, home alternatives to pre-school or homeschooling from one of these programs.

[dawn of ns]

Here's a link to the full text of the bill. I am really not a fan of the HSLDA's spin on stuff so I generally read further on a given issue.

[Parrothead]

Here's a link to the full text of the bill. I am really not a fan of the HSLDA's spin on stuff so I generally read further on a given issue.

I read the link. I still don't like it. With the financial crisis we are in now I don't think the government needs to spend more money on programs like this. I honestly don't want to pay for it.

[Ellie]

What I'm not in favor of is the "home visits." Although these are "voluntary" right now, there shouldn't be home visits in the first place, and at some point, someone will refuse, and she'll be harrassed because "every one else" allows them.

[Laura K (NC)]

My 3rd child was born about a month after we moved to NC. After I got home from the hospital I got a call from a nurse who wanted to come visit me. I didn't want a nurse to come to my house. We had just moved in, I was exhausted after a rough delivery, and I had a 2yo and a 4yo. She was insistent about scheduling a visit, and I was adamant about her not coming. I began to worry that she would show up anyway, unannounced. I began to worry if Social Services was going to come inspect me, because I had refused this hospital's "gracious" service to new moms. I could just see them justifying the visit by wondering WHY I could possibly turn down this professional help. I must have something to hide, right?

 

The U.S. government doesn't have a good record of educational skill, especially compared to other developed countries. They have no business taking on any extra authority over families. One of the lines in the bill made me especially mad. They want to provide parents with --

 

 

"activities designed to help parents become full partners in the education of their children."

 

What!? Parents are supposed to become full partners? Partners? I have a parental partner. God gave my three kids to my husband and I, not to the government. The government isn't even a junior partner in raising our kids. The government, as far as I'm concerned, is the anti-partner.

 

The government should stick to things it actually knows about. If it feels like spending money, congressmen can give themselves another raise or something. It needs to keep out of private homes. It is not welcome.

 

This whole government interference in family life is getting waaayyy out of hand. It's happening in Canada and England too. Never in man's history has the government been so well-equipped to gather personal information, control behavior, and intrude on personal family issues. It is based on condescension: citizens are like children. They can't think for themselves, they can't possibly make good decisions on their own, so the government is trying once again to forbid freedom, and the necessary successes and failures that accompany freedom. The bill recommends collecting information on

1. parental practices

2. child health and development indicators

3. child maltreatment indicators

4. school readiness indicators

Can people really want to be charted and labeled forever as being either satisfactory, "special," or a troublemaker? Can the government be trusted with this information once it gathers it? What exactly is freedom, anyway?

[SabrinainPA]

Thank you, Laura and Ellie. You articulated my fears. I know we need social service programs, but they seem to come at the cost of our freedoms. I know HSLDA is a hot-button issue for some, but, in this case, I believe the message is being lost because of the messenger. I just cannot believe a $190 million program like this is being tossed about now, with so much else going on financially. We live on so little already, with 5 children, and we have never asked for any help. I just want to be able to take care of my own, in my own way.

[mysticamethyst]

This whole government interference in family life is getting waaayyy out of hand. It's happening in Canada and England too. Never in man's history has the government been so well-equipped to gather personal information, control behavior, and intrude on personal family issues. It is based on condescension: citizens are like children. They can't think for themselves, they can't possibly make good decisions on their own, so the government is trying once again to forbid freedom, and the necessary successes and failures that accompany freedom. The bill recommends collecting information on

1. parental practices

2. child health and development indicators

3. child maltreatment indicators

4. school readiness indicators

Can people really want to be charted and labeled forever as being either satisfactory, "special," or a troublemaker? Can the government be trusted with this information once it gathers it? What exactly is freedom, anyway?

Yep, what Laura said.:iagree:

[sunshine]

I know in my gut I shouldn't ask this but here goes... Why is HSLDA such a 'hot button'.

Everything I have ever received from them or read they are supporting, supported homeschooling and our freedom to school. They were an absolute force in California when they tried to make homeschooling illegal

 

Also, I know there are poor mothers out there who need programs. They are usually the ones that get help through head start and medicaid with their pediatricians. They are getting help and services already. The programs are there. But just like every other facet of life it is a choice whether those women care enough to take advantage of them. The only way the ones who usually don't take advantage of programs to benefit their young children will be to tie the program to a punitive program. Example. you cannot receive your welfare check, or WIC or medicaid coverage if you dont' participate.

 

Bottom line, the ones who care are already doing something, you can't make someone care enough to take action if they really don't care.

 

OK, attack already...:bigear: I am listening.

[CLHCO]

What!? Parents are supposed to become full partners? Partners? I have a parental partner. God gave my three kids to my husband and I, not to the government. The government isn't even a junior partner in raising our kids. The government, as far as I'm concerned, is the anti-partner.

 

The government should stick to things it actually knows about. If it feels like spending money, congressmen can give themselves another raise or something. It needs to keep out of private homes. It is not welcome.

 

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

Laura, I think I love you.

[Mrs Mungo]

I know in my gut I shouldn't ask this but here goes... Why is HSLDA such a 'hot button'.

 

http://hsislegal.com/

 

http://homeschooling.gomilpitas.com/articles/102299.htm

 

http://treasureseekers.wordpress.com/2007/12/18/alternatives-to-hslda/

[Peek a Boo]

as far as the OP, I agree w/ Laura and Parrothead:

 

$190 million that can be used for something else.

 

when we're already in debt up to our top hats.

 

 

 

http://hsislegal.com/

 

http://homeschooling.gomilpitas.com/articles/102299.htm

 

http://treasureseekers.wordpress.com/2007/12/18/alternatives-to-hslda/

 

HS is legal, but is being challenged a lot in the state legislatures. Tim Lambert [THSC] shares a lot of insight about what happens behind closed doors that never makes it to the public floor. i remember talking to homeschool legal watch groups in other states too a few years ago--it's not something limited to Texas. HS may be legal now, but the NEA is always looking for ways to change that.

 

"When we helped him start his legal defense program, Mike promised when all states made good laws, he would work himself out of a job."

 

Even if the laws all of a sudden were WONDERFUL for all states, you'll still have organizations like the NEA looking to change that. When our laws can't be changed anymore, maybe I'll agree they will "work themselves out of a job" --until then: constant vigilance. OK has it "guaranteed" in their Constitution....yeah....and so is the second amendment "guaranteed" in the US Constitution. Until someone decides to interpret a BAN on something as "not infringing."

 

I always rec that TX homeschoolers join THSC if they feel they need to join a group [i don't], but in NY, there isn't a comparable statewide legal organization. i saw HSLDA work well for a lot of families up there. Of course, i also saw them rec'd stuff that was just stupid :) I did notice on the "State Associations Excluded" that for NY, they list LEAH as having a SoF --that's a bit misleading. You don't have to agree to the SoF to be a member, just to vote or sit on the board. They do ask that you sign that you are aware of LEAH's Christian nature --an "i promise not to rock the boat" type of statement. There were atheists, LDS, and Muslims in LEAH when I was there. has it changed?

 

i do agree people should know the pros and cons about HSLDA [and THSC].

 

per that blog, something else that came up was political clout. I did notice that in NY and down here in TX. Many parents did know the law [and it took WAY MORE than a couple hours to really know the ins and outs of NY law], and might be able to get stuff done on their own. but families in the same school district absolutely received different replies and intimidation based on whether they did it on their own or sent in HSLDA.

 

another thing -- apparently the legal situation is still such that it's profitable enough to have a few different alternatives to HSLDA. ;)

 

I only rec a legal group if a few specific circumstances apply:

1. it will simply make the family's first year of HSing more relaxed --worry can be a huge detriment. Families that worry too much may very well benefit from belonging to a legal organization.

2. If the spouse won't support homeschooling unless the family joins

3. If the family has extended family members who are VITRIOLIC to the family's homeschool decision --nasty, NASTY case in TX over this.

4. If the family has special needs children AND the regularly-seen medical community is anti-homeschooling. When i've talked to Doug and Patsy Arnold [TX Special Kids] they have mentioned that so often parents/families w/ special needs children are just too exhausted from dealing w/ the special needs that dealing w/ Yet Another source of frustration is worth delegating to someone else.

[Ellie]

I know in my gut I shouldn't ask this but here goes... Why is HSLDA such a 'hot button'.

 

I have never been able to figure it out. I read all the things that opponents say, and I still can't figure it out. In fact, one of the first board wars I was involved in when I began posting on the Internet was over HSLDA. I was young and foolish then, lol, but it just never ocurred to me that people would be opposed to the organization.

 

:confused:

[Nestof3]

You know what? I am sick of the gov't always being willing to spend people's money to take such perfect care of people. I am to the point of just not caring about people who choose to have children without learning anything about it. There are libraries, internet resources, and so much out there that has never been available before, and yet IT IS JUST NOT ENOUGH.

 

I am sick of the responsible paying for the irresponsible, and I don't care how many times I hear the same people on this forum saying they're so glad these resources are there, it is robbery to keep finding more things for those who actually pay most of the taxes to fund. blah blah blah It's always easier to spend someone else's money. I wonder how much the recipients of this sort of program are paying in federal taxes? Oh, who really cares, right? There are always plenty of wealthy people to fund it.

 

If you have no idea where to go to learn more about babies, you should keep your legs closed until you take some time to learn.

[asta]

If you have no idea where to go to learn more about babies, you should keep your legs closed until you take some time to learn.

 

HA!

[Amy in Orlando]

Dawn, I have to agree with you.

[VaKim]

You know what? I am sick of the gov't always being willing to spend people's money to take such perfect care of people. I am to the point of just not caring about people who choose to have children without learning anything about it. There are libraries, internet resources, and so much out there that has never been available before, and yet IT IS JUST NOT ENOUGH.

 

I am sick of the responsible paying for the irresponsible, and I don't care how many times I hear the same people on this forum saying they're so glad these resources are there, it is robbery to keep finding more things for those who actually pay most of the taxes to fund. blah blah blah It's always easier to spend someone else's money. I wonder how much the recipients of this sort of program are paying in federal taxes? Oh, who really cares, right? There are always plenty of wealthy people to fund it.

 

If you have no idea where to go to learn more about babies, you should keep your legs closed until you take some time to learn.

:iagree:

[Amy in NY]

 

I always rec that TX homeschoolers join THSC if they feel they need to join a group [i don't], but in NY, there isn't a comparable statewide legal organization. i saw HSLDA work well for a lot of families up there. Of course, i also saw them rec'd stuff that was just stupid :) I did notice on the "State Associations Excluded" that for NY, they list LEAH as having a SoF --that's a bit misleading. You don't have to agree to the SoF to be a member, just to vote or sit on the board. They do ask that you sign that you are aware of LEAH's Christian nature --an "i promise not to rock the boat" type of statement. There were atheists, LDS, and Muslims in LEAH when I was there. has it changed?...

 

i do agree people should know the pros and cons about HSLDA [and THSC]...

 

per that blog, something else that came up was political clout. I did notice that in NY and down here in TX. Many parents did know the law [and it took WAY MORE than a couple hours to really know the ins and outs of NY law], and might be able to get stuff done on their own. but families in the same school district absolutely received different replies and intimidation based on whether they did it on their own or sent in HSLDA...

 

 

I only rec a legal group if a few specific circumstances apply:

1. it will simply make the family's first year of HSing more relaxed --worry can be a huge detriment. Families that worry too much may very well benefit from belonging to a legal organization.

2. If the spouse won't support homeschooling unless the family joins

3. If the family has extended family members who are VITRIOLIC to the family's homeschool decision --nasty, NASTY case in TX over this.

4. If the family has special needs children AND the regularly-seen medical community is anti-homeschooling. When i've talked to Doug and Patsy Arnold [TX Special Kids] they have mentioned that so often parents/families w/ special needs children are just too exhausted from dealing w/ the special needs that dealing w/ Yet Another source of frustration is worth delegating to someone else.

 

 

Adding to Peek's list above:

5. If the person you report to is new. (In NY, this is the Superintendent. Our district seems to go through Supt. quickly so I will be a lifetime member, it seems.)

6. If you live in a high-reg state and hear about issues locally that may affect you.

 

 

 

Peek is absolutely correct. I don't agree with all that HSLDA does. BUT we live in a high-reg state and have had to use their services. I don't think the outcome would have been in our favor or that our stand would have been taking seriously if they hadn't been there with us. So for me, that $120/yr is well worth it. I could never have afforded a local attorney's fees nor would have found one knowledgeable enough to have worked for us.

 

If you are someone reading this thread who is on the fence about HSLDA, don't immediately write them off. You never know when you may need their assistance. I think our homeschooling rights are not guaranteed at all and to live as if they are is very naive.

[Amy in NY]

What I'm not in favor of is the "home visits." Although these are "voluntary" right now, there shouldn't be home visits in the first place, and at some point, someone will refuse, and she'll be harrassed because "every one else" allows them.

 

Yup. ITA.

 

FWIW, this was our issue with our school district a few years ago. They wanted more info about our hs program than they were allowed to require. The Supt called me personally to ask why I wouldn't give it - everyone else did. Our refusal to give in put us in a tight spot even though we were right.

 

And it would happen with this bill.

[Peek a Boo]

I have never been able to figure it out. I read all the things that opponents say, and I still can't figure it out. In fact, one of the first board wars I was involved in when I began posting on the Internet was over HSLDA. I was young and foolish then, lol, but it just never ocurred to me that people would be opposed to the organization.

 

:confused:

 

 

I can understand why they would be opposed, I just don't get the vitriol that usually accompanies that opposition.

[Ellie]

I can understand why they would be opposed, I just don't get the vitriol that usually accompanies that opposition.

 

I don't understand the vitriol, either, but I still don't understand the opposition.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I am sick of the responsible paying for the irresponsible, and I don't care how many times I hear the same people on this forum saying they're so glad these resources are there, it is robbery to keep finding more things for those who actually pay most of the taxes to fund. blah blah blah It's always easier to spend someone else's money. I wonder how much the recipients of this sort of program are paying in federal taxes? Oh, who really cares, right? There are always plenty of wealthy people to fund it.

 

If you have no idea where to go to learn more about babies, you should keep your legs closed until you take some time to learn.

 

What an absolutely ignorant and insensitive statement.

[Nestof3]

What an absolutely ignorant and insensitive statement.

 

Really? Please explain why.

[Parrothead]

:lurk5:

 

I'm wondering too because I agree with you Nestof3.

[yslek]

What I'm not in favor of is the "home visits." Although these are "voluntary" right now, there shouldn't be home visits in the first place, and at some point, someone will refuse, and she'll be harrassed because "every one else" allows them.

 

:iagree:

 

Exactly. I've never called my state rep before about anything, but I did about this one. (So did dh.) I totally choked (I was all set to leave a message, and got a real person instead:tongue_smilie:), but did manage to get out that I didn't approve of the bill.

 

Kelsy

[Peek a Boo]

What an absolutely ignorant and insensitive statement.

 

 

you could also say that proposing and funding a bill like this is "ignorant and insensitive" too based on what nestof3 just shared.

 

Everyone's offended at something these days.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Really? Please explain why.

 

It shows a total lack of understanding regarding these programs along with a serious lack of compassion IMHO- however if you knew that there are programs like this that are not only for low income families but for women just like you and I, who are often thankful for the home visits, you may not have made such a statement to begin with.

 

ETA- 99% of the people I know, no matter what their feelings are on funding programs like this would not have agreed with anyone taking such a slam at the poor.

Edited September 26, 2008 by Academy of Jedi Arts

[camibami]

I think the home visits are good idea, for those that want them.

 

IMO, many women get pregnant/have children without planning it, reading up on it, etc. They could use some help sometimes on things on nutrition, stimulating play, what is normal vs not, etc.

 

I suppose abortion is also a choice for them, thus reducing the need for funding any programs to help them. Somehow, I doubt those opposed to this are for that choice.

 

Time to put our money where our mouths are ladies- if we want to reduce abortions, we must address the reasons women have them. Making them illegal (having lived in a country where it is illegal, I feel I am qualified to say this) will not lower the rate one iota- it will just make it more dangerous and introduce an unsavory criminal element.

 

Its nice and all to say "keep your legs shut", (and so tasteful, too, thanks!) but completely unrealistic.

 

And my particular vitriol with HSLDA comes from their habit of speaking for all homeschoolers. They usually do *not* speak for me. If they kept it to hs'ing, fine. But they have become a conservative political lobby, working for causes with absolutely nothing to do with hs'ing. It is annoying in the extreme that they are the "face" of hs'ing.

[SabrinainPA]

"And my particular vitriol with HSLDA comes from their habit of speaking for all homeschoolers. They usually do *not* speak for me. If they kept it to hs'ing, fine. But they have become a conservative political lobby, working for causes with absolutely nothing to do with hs'ing. It is annoying in the extreme that they are the "face" of hs'ing"

 

Sorry, I don't know how to quote ... Why does this make HSLDA "bad"? They do not profess to be the be-all, end-all of homeschooling organizations, but they do have all our interests at heart. There is a war on in this country for control of our kids - "professionals", whether they be physicians, social workers, nurses, or school administrators, want to tell us that we can partner with them, but that we do not have the right to decide on our own how to raise our kids. We need their permission in Pennsylvania, based on current legislation, to continue with homeschooling if they decide we do not do our job well. This is ironic considering the state of the public schools - publis schools that are on probabtion for the poor academic performance of the children. This past month, two major school districts in my immediate area went on strike. At issue were none of the concerns we talk about on here - academics, availablity of materials, outcomes. The teachers wanted contracts for three years, guaranteeing 8.5% raises each year, and full medical benefits - no co-pay. How many of us see this kind of a raise each year, and how many enjoy free medical benefits? Yes, teachers have a difficult job. But, in reality, if taxes are raised each year to pay the teachers' salaries, and parents can't afford to pay for food to feed their kids or lose their homes because they can't make the mortgage, the teachers' jobs will just get harder. The home-life of students impacts their academic performance, and their overall well-being. The American government at all levels seems to have forgotten the very foundation upon which it is based - the American tax-payer, presumably comprised, at least in part, of families. I, for one, am extremely grateful that HSLDA is available to notify me when legislation is pending that may affect my rights. I do not believe this is an issue that should divide itself along party lines, race, or religious beliefs. I often believe if, as homeschoolers, we could all pull together, our numbers alone would safe-guard our parental rights. It is sad that we, too, are so divided.

[Nestof3]

It shows a total lack of understanding regarding these programs along with a serious lack of compassion IMHO- however if you knew that there are programs like this that are not only for low income families but for women just like you and I, who are often thankful for the home visits, you may not have made such a statement to begin with.

 

ETA- 99% of the people I know, no matter what their feelings are on funding programs like this would not have agreed with anyone taking such a slam at the poor.

 

I stand firm that there are plenty of available resources with which to better educated oneself on what a baby needs, and I do not think the taxpayers should pay for yet one more program. It is time for people to realize they are responsible for their actions. How can anyone possibly think that it's okay to force others to pay for the lack of planning on the part of others? Where will it stop? Let's have the taxpayers pay for birthday presents for others' kids, let's have them pay for others' cable bills, let's have them pay for internet access, let's have them pay for someone to babysit their kids, and season passes to fun parks, and so on.

 

And, I don't care who the programs offer assistance to -- poor, middle or wealthy -- it's not the place of the gov't to provide such a thing and the taxpayers to pick up the bill.

[Nestof3]

Time to put our money where our mouths are ladies- if we want to reduce abortions, we must address the reasons women have them. Making them illegal (having lived in a country where it is illegal, I feel I am qualified to say this) will not lower the rate one iota- it will just make it more dangerous and introduce an unsavory criminal element.

 

Its nice and all to say "keep your legs shut", (and so tasteful, too, thanks!) but completely unrealistic.

 

 

 

The reason people have abortions is because they want the enjoyment without taking into account the responsibility. And, I don't see a need to be tasteful about something I find equally distasteful. Irresponsible sex is equally distasteful in my opinion. It is common knowledge that sex can lead to pregnancy.

 

Regardless, it's not the taxpayer's responsibility to take up the slack.

[hsmamainva]

I think the home visits are good idea, for those that want them.

 

IMO, many women get pregnant/have children without planning it, reading up on it, etc. They could use some help sometimes on things on nutrition, stimulating play, what is normal vs not, etc.

 

I suppose abortion is also a choice for them, thus reducing the need for funding any programs to help them. Somehow, I doubt those opposed to this are for that choice.

 

Time to put our money where our mouths are ladies- if we want to reduce abortions, we must address the reasons women have them. Making them illegal (having lived in a country where it is illegal, I feel I am qualified to say this) will not lower the rate one iota- it will just make it more dangerous and introduce an unsavory criminal element.

 

Its nice and all to say "keep your legs shut", (and so tasteful, too, thanks!) but completely unrealistic.

 

And my particular vitriol with HSLDA comes from their habit of speaking for all homeschoolers. They usually do *not* speak for me. If they kept it to hs'ing, fine. But they have become a conservative political lobby, working for causes with absolutely nothing to do with hs'ing. It is annoying in the extreme that they are the "face" of hs'ing.

 

Well said!!! :iagree:

 

You can't say "We want abortion to be illegal" and "If they keep their babies, don't offer them any help with my taxpayer dollars" in the same breath without sounding extremely heartless.

[Kate in Arabia]

Why does this make HSLDA "bad"?

 

I don't say they are "bad", but they do not represent my world view. Why do they lobby against same-sex marriage? How is this directly germaine to homeschooling? Do they refuse to represent homosexual homeschoolers, should they seek to become members? Is there a screening process to join?

 

I also am not in agreement with the religious-based activities of some (I assume not all, but don't know) of their leadership, like the founding of Patrick Henry College, Generation Joshua, etc. As individuals of course they have every right to do this, and I'm sure many people support them, but I'm not interested in doing so.

[Peek a Boo]

oops- double post. "server busy" ;)

Edited September 26, 2008 by Peek a Boo

[Peek a Boo]

I think the home visits are good idea, for those that want them.

 

IMO, many women get pregnant/have children without planning it, reading up on it, etc. They could use some help sometimes on things on nutrition, stimulating play, what is normal vs not, etc.

 

I suppose abortion is also a choice for them, thus reducing the need for funding any programs to help them. Somehow, I doubt those opposed to this are for that choice.

 

Time to put our money where our mouths are ladies- if we want to reduce abortions, we must address the reasons women have them. Making them illegal (having lived in a country where it is illegal, I feel I am qualified to say this) will not lower the rate one iota- it will just make it more dangerous and introduce an unsavory criminal element.

 

Its nice and all to say "keep your legs shut", (and so tasteful, too, thanks!) but completely unrealistic.

 

And my particular vitriol with HSLDA comes from their habit of speaking for all homeschoolers. They usually do *not* speak for me. If they kept it to hs'ing, fine. But they have become a conservative political lobby, working for causes with absolutely nothing to do with hs'ing. It is annoying in the extreme that they are the "face" of hs'ing.

 

 

Ya know, i have a HUGE issue w/ places like NARAL trying to speak for "women" too, cuz they certainly aren't speaking for me. But my vitriol w/ them isn't how they present themselves, it's what they represent.

 

I am absolutely ready to put MY money where my mouth is --I'm not going to put OTHER people's money where MY mouth is tho.

 

Am i for programs like this? sure.

Am i for the gvt FUNDING those projects? no.

 

I also happen to believe that homeschoolers and private schoolers should get a tax break on our property taxes for doing the education and not relying on the gvt.

 

there is a HUGE difference between whether we support the idea of these programs vs whether we want the GVT to tax everyone to make these programs available. I believe the gvt should limit itself [mostly] to life-saving programs. When it can handle those w/ efficiency and no deficit THEN i'd be willing to look at what else to pile on. They are doing a horrible job w/ what their responsibilities as it is.

 

Most of us who are against abortion are already putting our money where our mouth is --and there are still women choosing to abort. Abut 98% of those are for convenience [as opposed to health/medical or crime victim reasons]. So no, i don't think that offering an option that doesn't address the convenience reasons that most women have an abortion is going to help much w/ the abortion rate.

 

Humans killing other humans is always going to be happening --outlawing murder itself isn't "realistic" --look at the rates there too. But we still strive in a civilized society to NOT kill other humans. Stating that we can't outlaw something because "people will do it anyway" is a horrible excuse for trampling Human Rights. And is pretty condescending to intelligent people who CAN be taught to follow the law.

 

and I guess I should clarify that I'm not for reducing abortions, I'm for recognizing Basic Human Rights to the unborn developing human.

[camibami]

Aw crud. I had a reply all done, and it was "server too busy". And then *again*.

 

This prolly won't go through either.

 

I guess I'll try later-?

[Peek a Boo]

You can't say "We want abortion to be illegal" and "If they keep their babies, don't offer them any help with my taxpayer dollars" in the same breath without sounding extremely heartless.

 

well sure!

 

and you can't say "I'm not really PRO-abortion, i just want women to have the right to kill the developing human inside her whenever she wants" without sounding heartless too.

[Peek a Boo]

Aw crud. I had a reply all done, and it was "server too busy". And then *again*.

 

This prolly won't go through either.

 

I guess I'll try later-?

 

 

I'm having that problem too and getting ready to hit the road anyway --see ya later ;)

 

feel free to PM me if they lock the thread.

[Parrothead]

It shows a total lack of understanding regarding these programs along with a serious lack of compassion IMHO- however if you knew that there are programs like this that are not only for low income families but for women just like you and I, who are often thankful for the home visits, you may not have made such a statement to begin with.

 

 

I honestly don't see it as a slam on the poor. The working poor that need help, the disabled that need help, the elderly that need help, I'm all for helping. I get angry over the people that feel entitled to benefits. The ones that make a living at beating the system. The women who deliberately have babies so they can get bigger checks. The grandmothers that have taught their daughters how to get by without working, having baby after baby just to get money from the government.

 

And where are the fathers of all these babies? Living with their mother's or their girlfriend's selling what is left on the EBT card, selling dope or just hanging around on the street corners. There is no reason they can't work, they just don't want to.

 

The government programs that are paid for with tax dollars are enabling these people to keep on beating the system. No, they won't ever get rich, but they are right where they want to be cruising along not having to work for a living.

 

And before you ask, I've heard these things from the source - the people that are beating the system. So, yeah, I do have a lack of compassion for people that refuse to work and expect to live on my tax dollars.

[Renee in NC]

The reason people have abortions is because they want the enjoyment without taking into account the responsibility. And, I don't see a need to be tasteful about something I find equally distasteful. Irresponsible sex is equally distasteful in my opinion. It is common knowledge that sex can lead to pregnancy.

 

Regardless, it's not the taxpayer's responsibility to take up the slack.

 

So, is there no room for mistakes, immaturity, bad decisions, or anything other than your experience in your worldview?

 

You are a confident, well-educated, intelligent, strong woman. Women like you can serve a great need in our world to mentor those who may not be as blessed as you are. For whatever reason, these babies are here and what could be greater than to have others mentor their mothers to be the best they can be so that the cycle is not continued?

 

Telling mothers, "Well, you should have kept your legs closed" is more than distasteful, especially when you have been given so many gifts. The way to prevent government programs is for their to be no need and the way to remove the need is to step up and be a person who strives to make the world a better place.

 

It's one thing to spew judgement on nameless people on an anonymous online forum and quite another to serve your fellow man. (Isn't that what we are called to do - serve others?)

[Heather in Neverland]

If you have no idea where to go to learn more about babies, you should keep your legs closed until you take some time to learn.

 

Woo Hoo! I wish I could rep you!

[Nestof3]

So, is there no room for mistakes, immaturity, bad decisions, or anything other than your experience in your worldview?

 

Sure there's room -- but it's still not something the taxpayer should have to fund. These people in need have to actually go to real people -- people who can hold them accountable and let them know that that pack of cigarettes could pay for a great educational toy for their kid. And, of course people make bad decisions, but why should others pay for them?

 

You are a confident, well-educated, intelligent, strong woman. Women like you can serve a great need in our world to mentor those who may not be as blessed as you are. For whatever reason, these babies are here and what could be greater than to have others mentor their mothers to be the best they can be so that the cycle is not continued?

 

I'm all for people doing this, but again, it should not be a gov't program.

 

The way to prevent government programs is for their to be no need and the way to remove the need is to step up and be a person who strives to make the world a better place.

 

The need was created by people making choices with no forethough. I try to make the world a better place where ever I am. The lack of gov't programs did not create the need, and my "not stepping up" didn't create the need.

 

Again, for those who really give a hoot, there are plenty of resources out there already. You can buy a "What to Expect When ..." book from every thrift store and rent one from every library. For those who really care, there are resources, and I'm not in favor of taking money from those who care to give to those who don't.

[Kate in Arabia]

Again, for those who really give a hoot, there are plenty of resources out there already. You can buy a "What to Expect When ..." book from every thrift store and rent one from every library. For those who really care, there are resources, and I'm not in favor of taking money from those who care to give to those who don't.

 

I thought the goal was really to benefit the child, not the parent. I don't know what the solution is, I'm not a big fan of huge government programs, but if the parents "don't care" do we just write off the kids as a loss? Too bad for them, their bad luck to be born into that situation?

 

I'm really kind of playing the devil's advocate here, because I don't like the idea of pouring money into programs, but I also don't think it's an issue we can just walk away from. I don't have a solution.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Just so you know, some of MY friends (college educated, spouse has a good job, nice house, etc) have participated in programs like this. In one case it was a nurse who made the home visits and one of my friends was alerted early on to have her son evaluated for autism. Her son was able to get services early on, which can make all the difference.

 

So in answer to the question where are the Daddies- some of them are at work, and some of them make it a point to be home when their home visit is scheduled so they can ask questions too.

 

I can not believe some of the truly insensitive comments on this thread. It makes me sad that my child has to grow up in such a world full of prejudice and ignorance.

[Danestress]

And, I don't see a need to be tasteful about something I find equally distasteful. Irresponsible sex is equally distasteful in my opinion. It is common knowledge that sex can lead to pregnancy.

 

 

 

To me, this is one of the problems with America (and other places too, I'm sure) that I really struggle with. Some things are distasteful. We can't entirely avoid them. But we don't have to sink to that in order to make a point.

 

At some point, people decided that since, in fact, people have done distasteful things since the beginning of time (like irresponsible s@x), we might as well put that on tv, into movies, into all our music, talk about it at dinner parties, and then post this way on forums. Frankly what you said put images in my mind that I didn't want. I did find it very distasteful and wish that I could live in a culture where no one talked that way.

 

But I agree with you about your position on the funding. I don't want to pay for it, and I agree that there are lots of ways people can get information if they want it to help them as parents. I do want women, however they conceived, to have acess to help and support, but I don't like this method.

 

But prude that I am, I do wish you wouldn't talk that way.

[Peek a Boo]

Just so you know, some of MY friends (college educated, spouse has a good job, nice house, etc) have participated in programs like this. In one case it was a nurse who made the home visits and one of my friends was alerted early on to have her son evaluated for autism. Her son was able to get services early on, which can make all the difference.

 

and I think that is a great thing --we should be encouraging more programs like this to be offered, just not gvt funded ones. NOBODY has said there isn't aplace for a program like this, we just disagree on WHO should be funding it. Is THAT insensitive???

 

So in answer to the question where are the Daddies- some of them are at work, and some of them make it a point to be home when their home visit is scheduled so they can ask questions too.

 

I agree that not all the dads are out n about.

 

I can not believe some of the truly insensitive comments on this thread. It makes me sad that my child has to grow up in such a world full of prejudice and ignorance.

 

That's what I think too when i see people defend the "right" to kill another human on demand for reasons other than medical issues or crime victim status.

 

I guess sadness abounds.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

. Is THAT insensitive???

 

That opinion is not but the way it was expressed was very insensitive and prejudicial.

 

And please stop assuming what I think or believe about the abortion issue. That is also very ignorant and prejudicial.

[5kidsforME]

I can not believe some of the truly insensitive comments on this thread. It makes me sad that my child has to grow up in such a world full of prejudice and ignorance.

 

It makes me sad that my children have to grow up in a world where a lot of people abuse the system and our/their hard earned tax dollars are paying for it.