Just venting--Secular Thought Police

[Mrs. Tharp]

Ugh. There are so many new crisis homeschoolers as everyone knows. Since I use mostly secular curriculum and consider myself largely secular I signed up for a couple of all-secular groups, one on FB, one not.   Apparently one tolerates religion-bashing. Someone remarked that they were so glad to have found the group because most hsers are "uber-religious" and "homeschool to get out of teaching their kids science". No moderator stepped in to defend the many, many religious hsers who prefer not to use religious curriculum and yes, do use science. 

Another group has a fairly restrictive view of "secular". I understood the issue with regards to wanting secular science and non-providential history but started asking questions and found out that yes, indeed they do forbid the following: recommending web sites that sell secular and non-secular curriculum, recommending materials that are written from a religious point of view even there are no explicit religious references, recommending materials that have had religious references removed in order to appeal to a wider market (I'm not talking about "neutral" science programs, more like Writeshop), recommending materials that are secular but the author thanks God in the intro, you all get the picture. I also asked about materials written from a classical and Charlotte Mason perspective, considering how entwined they are with Christian thought and ideals, and apparently that would be banned too. The thread was deleted before I could point out how many curricula recommended as secular fall under that umbrella. Under that definition someone can write a secular text, mention their faith in their acknowledgments or something, and get banned.

Anyhow, just venting. It just comes across as really thought-police-y and intolerant to me, and odd too, given all the stereotyping that goes on, how intolerant secular groups seem to be. I always thought that a religious perspective (history and science excluded) was a good jumping off point for discussion, myself.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Mrs. Tharp
to clarify and for grammar

[Jean in Newcastle]

True crisis homeschoolers will be gone once the crisis is over. And I suspect a good number will be gone even before the crisis is over. 

[Mrs. Tharp]

The FB group I mentioned was started by the author of a number of homeschool science curriculum, so I suspect she's around for the long haul.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Mrs. Tharp
clarity

[BusyMom5]

I think I'm on that group.  I stopped following it a while back bc I'm just over it.  I do consider myself a secular homeschooling, 90% of what I use is!   Also the pushing of agendas.  I consider myself to be 'left,' but apparently not that left.   

[73349]

My kid couldn't participate in the geography bee, a secular activity, because I can't sign the statement of faith required by the only group around here who does it. *shrug* Some groups are only for very narrow purposes.

There's enough on the homeschool market (especially "neutral" science) that people find it confusing, so... yeah, that's how they're doing it. A strictly secular group is strict, just like the strictly Christian groups can be strict.

But you could start your own FB group. Or threads here. 🙂

[Mrs. Tharp]

Fair enough. I guess I always thought that "secular" meant non-religious, not anti-religious. I mean, think about how much is excluded by the criteria I mentioned. They're also not being open about how restrictive they are, unlike most religious hs groups I've seen, who are quite upfront about it. Their actual, written definition of secular does not exclude any of the things I mentioned--it only states that the materials need to reflect the ideas of the majority of experts in the field. (Think about how many widely used hs curriculum have been written by um, non-experts.) Because of this, I don't think a lot of the users realize how narrow the allowed recommendations are. To be fair, since most of them are likely to be short-timers, they probably don't care.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Mrs. Tharp
perfectionism

[catz]

Plenty of religious groups are exclusive and intolerant too.  I know which group that is and I unfollowed also.   But it’s not like I haven’t seen at least as bad from the opposite end.   I might go there now and again to search.  I agree it is over the top and not my scene and I am not Christian. 

Back in the day, when stuff available didn’t work for us, I started something on my own.   Our local secular groups are inclusive and have plenty of academic minded church goers.   I find it a bit obnoxious when new comers complain about something volunteer run not being targeted right at them.  

[Shoeless]

1 hour ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

The FB group I mentioned was started by the author of a number of homeschool science curriculum, so I suspect she's around for the long haul.

 

Yeah, nothing is ever "secular enough" for that group. 

I also give a lot of side-eye to that author because surprise! The only materials deemed truly secular and recommended are the ones she's written or published through her company.  Yet she bangs on about how she's a scientist and knows blah blah blah. Well, if you were a scientist, you'd also know how conflict of interest can cast doubt upon your work. 

[Corraleno]

There are plenty of religious homeschool groups, and plenty that allow discussion of both secular and nonsecular materials. There are very very few that are very strictly secular, and SEA is one of them. If you don't like the restrictions in the SEA group, then there are plenty of other options. I don't get why someone would bash a group for not being exactly what they want when they can get what they want elsewhere. It's like going to an Italian restaurant and complaining that they won't let you order Thai food. Go to a Thai restaurant if that's what you want.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Corraleno

[Mrs. Tharp]

2 minutes ago, FuzzyCatz said:

Plenty of religious groups are exclusive and intolerant too.  I know which group that is and I unfollowed also.   But it’s not like I haven’t seen at least as bad from the opposite end.   I might go there now and again to search.  I agree it is over the top and not my scene and I am not Christian. 

Back in the day, when stuff available didn’t work for us, I started something on my own.   Our local secular groups are inclusive and have plenty of academic minded church goers.   I find it a bit obnoxious when new comers complain about something volunteer run not being targeted right at them.  

I didn't mean to be obnoxious. I genuinely had questions about their definition of secular since it was starting to seem more and more restrictive and I wanted to know what I could and couldn't recommend.

[Mrs. Tharp]

3 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

There are plenty of religious homeschool groups, and plenty that allow discussion of both secular and nonsecular materials. There are very very few that are very strictly secular, and SEA is one of them. If you don't like the restrictions in the SEA group, then there are plenty of other options. I don't get why someone would bash a group for not being exactly what they want when they can get what they want elsewhere. It's like going to an Italian restaurant and complaining that they won't let you order Thai food. Go to a Thai restaurant if that's what you want.

Okay, I thought it would be okay to complain here. I'm sorry to offend. As I said, they were not being very specific. I'm not religious myself, so I don't tend to hang out in religious groups. Sorry to trigger you.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Mrs. Tharp

[catz]

2 minutes ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

I didn't mean to be obnoxious. I genuinely had questions about their definition of secular since it was starting to seem more and more restrictive and I wanted to know what I could and couldn't recommend.

Sorry I didn’t mean to insinuate you were.   I am into 14 years of over volunteered burn out and I’m definitely projecting.  

[Shoeless]

1 minute ago, Corraleno said:

There are plenty of religious homeschool groups, and plenty that allow discussion of both secular and nonsecular materials. There are very very few that are very strictly secular, and SEA is one of them. If you don't like the restrictions in the SEA group, then there are plenty of other options. I don't get why someone would bash a group for not being exactly what they want when they can just choose from so many other groups. It's like going to an Italian restaurant and complaining that they won't let you order Thai food. Go to a Thai restaurant if that's what you want.

 

It's not like going to an Italian restaurant and asking for Thai food. It's that their definition of secular is very restrictive.  At one point, Build Your Library was debated as "not secular" because Emily used a poetry anthology that included a poem that was used as hymn lyrics in one person's childhood church.  The suggestion to simply skip that poem was unacceptable.  I don't even think that particular poem was specifically assigned in BYL, but just the fact that it was in the anthology was "problematic", and caused a lot of people to demand that BYL be removed from the list of acceptable secular curriculum.   

[Jean in Newcastle]

If enough people find a group's policies to be too restrictive then they will leave the group.  And if they leave the group, then the group will die - unless just the group administrator wants to talk to herself and a few others. 

I am totally biased here, but I think that people can discuss secular science curricula as well as other subjects and how to teach them right here.  😉  (Note:  I am a Christian but used secular science programs for our homeschool.) 

[PrincessMommy]

35 minutes ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

Fair enough. I guess I always thought that "secular" meant non-religious, not anti-religious. I mean, think about how much is excluded by the criteria I mentioned. They're also not being open about how restrictive they are, unlike most religious hs groups I've seen, who are quite upfront about it. Their actual, written definition of secular does not exclude any of the things I mentioned--it only states that the materials need to reflect the ideas of the majority of experts in the field. (Think about how many widely used hs curriculum have been written by um, non-experts.) Because of this, I don't think a lot of the users realize how narrow the allowed recommendations are. To be fair, since most of them are likely to be short-timers, they probably don't care.

I agree that it doesn't make any sense.  How in the world do they teach history if any type of reference to religion is banned?

But, I also agree that some Christian groups can be selective and strict. 

[hs03842]

-

Edited December 9, 2020 by JoyKM

[Mrs. Tharp]

I hear you. I live in a very secular area of the country and don't see that kind of thing often, though I've heard several stories about it and was exposed to a bit before I moved out of the suburbs to an urban area. My point is, though, that in this group, people are fleeing one kind of restrictive mindset  and embracing another that is equally restrictive. In the case of the FB group, I doubt they understand that they are making that choice.  I agree that the group is not a good long term fit. I get exasperated with religion bashing, or contemptuous speech directed at any group of people, as well as overly rigid ideological stances. I sympathize with the need to find your people.

[Corraleno]

3 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said:

I agree that it doesn't make any sense.  How in the world do they teach history if any type of reference to religion is banned?

History curricula that discuss the role of religion in history from a secular viewpoint (e.g. the role of the Catholic Church in the Renaissance, the political ramifications of Henry VIII splitting with the Catholic Church and founding the Church of England, etc.) are fine. Curricula that teach history from a religious perspective, even if that is implicit and not explicit, is not considered secular by their definition. For example, SEA does not consider SOTW 1 & 2 to be secular, but 3 & 4 are ok. Here is the definition of secular history from SEA's website:

"Secular history curriculum is one that does not posit, present, or endorse religious beliefs, texts, philosophies, and teachings as factual. Secular curricula can and often will discuss the influence of religions and religious belief on historical events.

The two common ways that non-secular curricula present religious beliefs and teachings as factual are:
• presenting religious texts as historically factual accounts
• presenting historical events as divinely influenced

Neither of which can be a part of a secular history curriculum."

 

[Mrs. Tharp]

1 minute ago, kand said:

I know the one you mean only because I have seen other secular homeschoolers complain elsewhere that the group is really over the top and difficult to participate in, and also the way she bashes any other science curriculum other than her own. Doesn’t sound like my cup of tea.

I can see both sides of this one. Totally, it’s her group and she can run it the way she wants, but I also see what is frustrating about it to Mrs.Tharp. Doesn’t mean it needs to change, but I see why it’s frustrating. To me it would be more like going to an Italian restaurant and being told you can’t even mention that one time you had some Thai food that was pretty decent. I help administrate a local secular homeschooling group, and to me it’s important that everyone is included, especially because there has been such a history of Christian homeschooling groups excluding people with different beliefs. It would be kind of like if we didn’t allow anyone who had any kind of religious belief of any kind to participate in our secular homeschooling group. Yes, that would be our right, but Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, and other people of faith would also be within their rights to mutter to each other about their opinions on the matter. We would be a pretty narrow, exclusionary group if we had eliminated all of those members, which would be really sad.

But again, obviously it’s the group owner’s right to run it that way, and all of our rights to find it’s not for us and go elsewhere.

 

Thank you, yes this. Isn't the whole point to be more inclusive? Of course she can do what she wants. It would be nice if she delineated it more clearly. Maybe she doesn't because it may (understandably) put people off.

[Mrs. Tharp]

1 minute ago, Corraleno said:

History curricula that discuss the role of religion in history from a secular viewpoint (e.g. the role of the Catholic Church in the Renaissance, the political ramifications of Henry VIII splitting with the Catholic Church and founding the Church of England, etc.) are fine. Curricula that teach history from a religious perspective, even if that is implicit and not explicit, is not considered secular by their definition. For example, SEA does not consider SOTW 1 & 2 to be secular, but 3 & 4 are ok. Here is the definition of secular history from SEA's website:

"Secular history curriculum is one that does not posit, present, or endorse religious beliefs, texts, philosophies, and teachings as factual. Secular curricula can and often will discuss the influence of religions and religious belief on historical events.

The two common ways that non-secular curricula present religious beliefs and teachings as factual are:
• presenting religious texts as historically factual accounts
• presenting historical events as divinely influenced

Neither of which can be a part of a secular history curriculum."

 

Yes, but according to the conversation I just had with a moderator, Susan Wise Bauer's Christian beliefs would arguably makes anything she writes off-limits.

[Shoeless]

2 minutes ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

I hear you. I live in a very secular area of the country and don't see that kind of thing often, though I've heard several stories about it and was exposed to a bit before I moved out of the suburbs to an urban area. My point is, though, that in this group, people are fleeing one kind of restrictive mindset  and embracing another that is equally restrictive. In the case of the FB group, I doubt they understand that they are making that choice.  I agree that the group is not a good long term fit. I get exasperated with religion bashing, or contemptuous speech directed at any group of people, as well as overly rigid ideological stances. I sympathize with the need to find your people.

Where do you live? I live in a very religious part of the US and would dearly love to move to some place less suffocating. 

[Jyhwkmama]

1 hour ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

The FB group I mentioned was started by the author of a number of homeschool science curriculum, so I suspect she's around for the long haul.

I know exactly what groups and who you are talking about. I am an atheist, secular homeschooler and I had to leave those groups there was so much intolerance.

Just because someone has a faith does not automatically make them an inferior authority on a topic or a bad homeschooler. I would never use YE science or an overtly religious history program (Notgrass), but I can get over/edit a little religion in a math program (like Horizons), strongly edit and use an overtly religious math program (CLE), understand and explain to my child the religious references to the beauty of God's creation in a non evangelical program like Climbing to Good English, expand a neutral science program (LOVE Nancy Larson) to add in materials and references to evolution, or use a creative writing program that has some separate religious materials (WriteShop Junior). Religion is not the point of any of those materials and I tolerate other people's points of view. I know that as the teacher, my view has the most sway on my child. He lives in my house.

I got so irritated with how overboard/intolerant those groups are to the mere mention of religion, I went in and deleted them all one day. God is not an offensive concept. As long as no one is pushing religion on me and I fine. Live and let live.

Many, many excellent material are written by people of faith. Those intolerant homeschoolers are missing out.

[Btervet]

I know the group and have had the same frustrations. Especially with SOTW and science curriculums. I'm as secular as they come, but the exclusions can be extreme. Example: not allowing Mr Q science because he doesn't teach evolution until middle school. 

I also believe the groups has lost the "academic" focus it started with. I believe the firm stance against books like SOTW is just to promote the owners companies new history books. The reality of restrictions don't line up with the supposed philosophy laid out in their rules, and it's become worse over time. 

Edited August 10, 2020 by Btervet
Spelling

[itsheresomewhere]

I know that group and have the same issues.  It can get very nasty on it.  

[Corraleno]

1 hour ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

Yes, but according to the conversation I just had with a moderator, Susan Wise Bauer's Christian beliefs would arguably makes anything she writes off-limits.

That is not accurate. There have been extensive discussions about SOTW on SEA, and they have always said that volumes 3 & 4 are fine.

ETA: This is a direct quote from a Mod, posted on June 26th: "We use a very specific definition of secular academics in SEA. Story of the World vol 1 & 2 do not meet that definition of secular academics, vol 3 and 4 do."

Edited August 10, 2020 by Corraleno

[Mrs. Tharp]

Yeah, she is marketing a ton of new materials on her website. I hadn't made the connection. A big reason I asked the questions because I was looking for clarity and consistency and there didn't seem to be much. As in, if I understand the rationale for banning this I'll have an easier time figuring out what to recommend.

[Shoeless]

 

1 minute ago, Btervet said:

I know the group and have had the same frustrations. Especially with SOTW and science curriculums. I'm as secular as they come, but she exclusions can be extreme. Example: not knowing Mr Q science because he doesn't teach evolution until middle school. 

I also believe the groups has lost the "academic" focus it started with. I believe the firm stance against books like SOTW is just to promote the owners companies new history books. The reality of restrictions don't line up with the supposed philosophy laid out in their rules, and it's become worse over time. 

 

Which makes no sense, because RSO doesn't teach evolution in the lower levels, either (unless something has changed. The RSO books I tried a few years ago never discussed evolution). I asked about that once and was told by a moderation that evolution was too big a concept for young children and that is why they were omitted from the early RSO levels. Right...

 

[Mrs. Tharp]

10 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

That is not accurate. There have been extensive discussions about SOTW on SEA, and they have always said that volumes 3 & 4 are fine.

Well, when I pushed, that's not what they said. I asked if it was okay to recommend a secular product with a Christian author and the answer was a resounding no.

Edited August 10, 2020 by Mrs. Tharp

[Jyhwkmama]

1 minute ago, MissLemon said:

 

 

Which makes no sense, because RSO doesn't teach evolution in the lower levels, either (unless something has changed. The RSO books I tried a few years ago never discussed evolution). I asked about that once and was told by a moderation that evolution was too big a concept for young children and that is why they were omitted from the early RSO levels. Right...

 

See, Nancy Larson doesn't teach it either (and it is for K-6 approximately). Technically it is neutral, but when you lay out the posters of the different animal groups for your kid to see you can just say "see how life started in the ocean and then animals evolved and partially moved to land and then evolved more and fully moved to land..." I can't imagine teaching high school biology without evolution being woven in, but little kids learn more basic things. The parts of a flower are the same no matter what. I was not taught much about evolution in PUBLIC school until 8th or 9th grade. I took many science classes at a public university and had no problem with the concepts or doing well in the classes.

[Mrs. Tharp]

26 minutes ago, MissLemon said:

Where do you live? I live in a very religious part of the US and would dearly love to move to some place less suffocating. 

The Pacific Northwest. Washington, in the Seattle area. It is wonderful here, but very expensive, just warning you. DH and I consider ourselves lucky to own a house.

[Mrs. Tharp]

8 minutes ago, Jyhwkmama said:

See, Nancy Larson doesn't teach it either (and it is for K-6 approximately). Technically it is neutral, but when you lay out the posters of the different animal groups for your kid to see you can just say "see how life started in the ocean and then animals evolved and partially moved to land and then evolved more and fully moved to land..." I can't imagine teaching high school biology without evolution being woven in, but little kids learn more basic things. The parts of a flower are the same no matter what. I was not taught much about evolution in PUBLIC school until 8th or 9th grade. I took many science classes at a public university and had no problem with the concepts or doing well in the classes.

All this kind of thing makes it seem like their standards are extremely arbitrary.

[Shoeless]

2 hours ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

The Pacific Northwest. Washington, in the Seattle area. It is wonderful here, but very expensive, just warning you. DH and I consider ourselves lucky to own a house.

 

Ah, nuts. 😞 That's one area that we had a chance to move to and vetoed. We're in Texas, and I'd love to live someplace where I don't get an earful about church from the roofer, the electrician, the hvac guy, the cement guy...

No joke, every single tradesman we've hired has felt the need to discuss his relationship with Jesus with us.  Our cement guy would not start work until he prayed over me and my house.  I appreciate the gesture, truly, but sometimes I just need a job to get done without any extras. 

Edited August 10, 2020 by MissLemon

[Jyhwkmama]

6 minutes ago, Mrs. Tharp said:

All this kind of thing makes it seem like their standards are extremely arbitrary.

I think there is an undercurrent of anger that there are not more wholly secular homeschool materials. I get the irritation. I, too, wish the perfect science or history program existed. However, I will not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Climbing to Good English is a beautiful and effective grammar program. I will not completely discount it because one question out of 50 says something about "God's beautiful flowers." Instead, I just explain to my kid that an Amish person wrote this and has a different point of view. It is fine. I actually like my kid to understand that not everyone is the same.

Edited August 10, 2020 by Jyhwkmama

[Wheres Toto]

I"m on multiple SEA groups and haven't seen some of the things you are talking about.   Build Your Library is recommended all the time.   SOTW 3 & 4 are discussed.   I've seen Mr. Q discussed (although I rarely see that one come up anywhere for some reason).     They also won't discuss things that they haven't seen and can't confirm are secular.   That's mentioned in the About post.  

I think some secular people in religious areas feel a little PTSD from their interactions with religious homeschoolers and they are looking for groups where they don't have to worry about that sneaking in at all.   I do feel like there are a lot of people in the groups that were raised with some of the most restrictive types of Christianity and are often reacting to that.    There are other Secular groups that aren't so restrictive for those who want that, Inclusive groups for those who want that.  Theirs happens to be fairly narrowly defined.  

[PrincessMommy]

42 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

History curricula that discuss the role of religion in history from a secular viewpoint (e.g. the role of the Catholic Church in the Renaissance, the political ramifications of Henry VIII splitting with the Catholic Church and founding the Church of England, etc.) are fine. Curricula that teach history from a religious perspective, even if that is implicit and not explicit, is not considered secular by their definition. For example, SEA does not consider SOTW 1 & 2 to be secular, but 3 & 4 are ok. Here is the definition of secular history from SEA's website:

"Secular history curriculum is one that does not posit, present, or endorse religious beliefs, texts, philosophies, and teachings as factual. Secular curricula can and often will discuss the influence of religions and religious belief on historical events.

The two common ways that non-secular curricula present religious beliefs and teachings as factual are:
• presenting religious texts as historically factual accounts
• presenting historical events as divinely influenced

Neither of which can be a part of a secular history curriculum."

 

I certainly understand that a secular group would not want to use curriculum that teaches or promotes a religious perspective.  But if a group won't even allow someone to "thank God" in their Introduction then I would suspect they wouldn't even allow a curriculum to mention the place of religion in something like Bach's music or Martin Luther King's worldview.  I would hope that various secular curriculums can acknowledge the place of religion in people's lives without promoting said religion.   It just sounded like one of the groups the OP mentions can't even do that.  

[Mrs. Tharp]

I know that the group leadership has pressured Emily to change some of her materials to fit their definition of secular. She is revamping some of the levels and they refuse to recommend them until she is finished. So whenever BYL is recommended the moderator will jump in with a caveat. I agree with the ptsd part; when I was a new homeschooler I experienced a little of that myself. But then people started freaking out if religion was mentioned in any context and slamming religion out of the context of their own personal experiences and they lost me. A safe space is fine; outright intolerance and contempt gets old.

[Jyhwkmama]

1 minute ago, PrincessMommy said:

I certainly understand that a secular group would not want to use curriculum that teaches or promotes a religious perspective.  But if a group won't even allow someone to "thank God" in their Introduction then I would suspect they wouldn't even allow a curriculum to mention the place of religion in something like Bach's music or Martin Luther King's worldview.  I would hope that various secular curriculums can acknowledge the place of religion in people's lives without promoting said religion.   It just sounded like one of the groups the OP mentions can't even do that.  

Yes! There is a difference between between having a strong sense of faith and being pushy/evangelical. You can see that difference in curriculum too. 

[Mrs. Tharp]

Absolutely. I agree 100%. I've always respected the strong sense of faith generally and in homeschooling materials.

[Corraleno]

5 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said:

I certainly understand that a secular group would not want to use curriculum that teaches or promotes a religious perspective.  But if a group won't even allow someone to "thank God" in their Introduction then I would suspect they wouldn't even allow a curriculum to mention the place of religion in something like Bach's music or Martin Luther King's worldview.  I would hope that various secular curriculums can acknowledge the place of religion in people's lives without promoting said religion.   It just sounded like one of the groups the OP mentions can't even do that.  

There is a difference between an author expressing his or her personal religious beliefs in the introduction of a book, and a factual discussion of the religious beliefs of a historical figure when those beliefs are relevant to their actions. That is a distinction that SEA chooses to make; if other people don't care about that distinction, there are plenty of places they can ask for recommendations. 

[Jyhwkmama]

Some religious homeschooling groups are intolerant. I won't be a member of those groups either. 

[Mrs. Tharp]

No, neither will I. At least the statement of faith requirement is a heads-up. The point is, SEA's guidelines don't specify how restrictive they are. It might give a lot of their members pause if they did. "Secular" can mean anything from not explicitly religious, to the extremes SEA goes to. Most secular groups don't go as far down the purity road as SEA has. Even the parent partnership program at the local school district doesn't go nearly as far as SEA does when defining what secular includes and does not, and that's with state oversight.

[Mrs. Tharp]

Well, the thing is, I am very interested in discussing homeschool curriculum and in helping out new people. I don't think it's unreasonable to have clear guidelines for doing so, or, since they are so particular, a list of which curriculum are banned and why. Especially when if a curriculum has one mention of God in the intro, a lot of people might not think it's an issue, or even, as in my case, remember that the mention is there. To me, a curriculum is about so much more than a single mention of God. But that's just me. They won't even let new people mention religious curriculum they've used when they are trying to ask about a secular equivalent. Different strokes indeed.

[Mrs. Tharp]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

Yes, definitely. That sounds like bad management -- do they not have guidelines? 

There are some, but nothing that covers the kinds of questions I asked. For example, I was told before I asked all my questions that I couldn't recommend IEW products because some of them weren't secular and that I couldn't recommend Rainbow Resources for buying some curriculum because they weren't all secular. That kind of thing isn't listed in their guidelines. I got concerned about recommending some wonderful secular curriculum I know of simply because they are only sold on sites that also sell non-secular curriculum. It was a little crazy-making, so when the head of the group reposted the guidelines, I decided to inquire in more detail.

[theelfqueen]

Amazon sells Bibles. And Korans. And atheist texts.... every decent bookstore does... are you allowed to recommend Amazon? Or Abebooks? Etc. I'm not sure I could work out the guidelines. What does it matter where I buy say a Saxon math book or a copy of the Hobbit? 

Edited August 10, 2020 by theelfqueen

[Mrs. Tharp]

10 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Hah, so then that just doesn't sound useful to be in, lol. 

I've noticed people become formulaic about this stuff when they get overwhelmed, to be honest. Like, it's hard to sift through everything and think about it, so then you make rigid rules and by golly, you enforce them. It's not my favorite way to deal with people, but people do it. 

 

9 minutes ago, theelfqueen said:

Amazon sells Bibles. And Korans. And atheist texts.... every decent bookstore does... are you allowed to recommend Amazon? Or Abebooks? Etc. I'm not sure I could work out the guidelines. 

That's definitely the implication.  Maybe they are getting overwhelmed like square_25 suggested. There is an arbitrary feel to many of the remarks. "We can't recommend/mention such and such curriculum now, but once the single non-secular resource is replaced, we'll be able to." Then they'll insist that the person who recommended it delete the remark or delete it themselves. It's like "the curriculum that must not be named" instead of a remark like "We consider this curriculum non-secular because of this, and this, and so we don't recommend it here."

Edited August 10, 2020 by Mrs. Tharp

[Mrs. Tharp]

Btw, I am relieved and somewhat gratified to announce that I've been kicked out of that group for asking those questions. They've saved me the trouble of removing myself. At this point I feel like it's a compliment. Here's the closest thing to a proud emoji. 😊 If the act of asking questions is enough to get me removed, it wasn't the group for me.

[Shoeless]

19 minutes ago, Bagels McGruffikin said:

Honestly even here in Ohio religion isn’t particularly overt. People are friendly but don’t get into the personal or politically provocative discussions very often, since it’s a very mixed area demographically - I think I have only had it happen when someone sees that I have a bumper sticker or when I mention where I attend church. 
 

There are lots of states that would fit - Colorado, Idaho, Minnesota, Ohio, etc. I haven’t found too many overtly religious areas, actually, outside of the South. New England is much the same - you may have a lot of religious attendance or personal belief but it’s not going to come up in dis lot conversation as aggressively as what I think you’re experiencing, if only because of social and personal boundaries being firmer 🙂

 

Ohio is our current favorite. I grew up in NY, and no one ever, ever asked me about religion. It would have been really rude and prying to quiz someone on their religious leanings. 

15 minutes ago, square_25 said:

In terms of secular places, it does tend to depend on what you want 🙂 . I know that people were never nasty to us in Austin at all, but there were signposts that we didn't belong, too. So it depends whether it's the actively aggressive people that are bothering you (which frankly sounds like that's the problem!), or just the feeling of being different. 

 

It's a little bit the aggressiveness and a little bit knowing I don't fit in here. I haven't met another one of "us" here.  The few secular families I know here are much more left leaning than we are, and are very into woo-woo pseudoscience. Austin would not be a good fit for us because we aren't liberal enough. 😕 

[Jyhwkmama]

Kansas City area is not what anyone would describe as liberal, but no one here asks me about my religious beliefs.

[Corraleno]

It's crazy the way SEA is being misrepresented here. 🙄  

There are PLENTY of groups, including the Hive, for "mostly secular" homeschoolers who have no problem with curricula that includes religion. I used Life of Fred and my son took multiple classes with Lukeion — I adore Lukeion, we have even traveled with them to Greece, Italy, and Turkey. I recommend Lukeion here all the time. I do not recommend them on SEA, because there is religious content in some of the courses, and I have no problem with the fact that Lukeion does not meet SEA's guidelines.

There ARE people who want their curriculum to be 100% free of any religion — are they not allowed to have their own FB group? Not even ONE freaking group, in a world where Christian homeschoolers are a large majority, with tons of resources and curricula available to them? If an explicitly, 100% secular group doesn't accept recommendations for curricula that are just "a little bit" religious, and recommendations for explicitly Christian companies, then they deserve to be bashed as "intolerant" and "thought police"? 

If a snarky, irreverent, very strictly secular homeschooling group is not your cup of tea, then feel free to unfollow and move on. 

[Btervet]

2 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

It's crazy the way SEA is being misrepresented here. 🙄  

There are PLENTY of groups, including the Hive, for "mostly secular" homeschoolers who have no problem with curricula that includes religion. I used Life of Fred and my son took multiple classes with Lukeion — I adore Lukeion, we have even traveled with them to Greece, Italy, and Turkey. I recommend Lukeion here all the time. I do not recommend them on SEA, because there is religious content in some of the courses, and I have no problem with the fact that Lukeion does not meet SEA's guidelines.

There ARE people who want their curriculum to be 100% free of any religion — are they not allowed to have their own FB group? Not even ONE freaking group, in a world where Christian homeschoolers are a large majority, with tons of resources and curricula available to them? If an explicitly, 100% secular group doesn't accept recommendations for curricula that are just "a little bit" religious, and recommendations for explicitly Christian companies, then they deserve to be bashed as "intolerant" and "thought police"? 

If a snarky, irreverent, very strictly secular homeschooling group is not your cup of tea, then feel free to unfollow and move on. 

I am a member of SEA and do get a lot out of it. I remember when it formed and was there at the start. But it's silly to pretend its perfect, and its getting worse. I have *no* problem with not allowing recommendations of religious based works. But its not as simple as "Well just go somewhere else." They have already pressured curriculum creators to drop borderline books just so they can be recommended. They have power at this point within the homeschooling world, and the extremes they go to (including bannings for mistakes or questions) have negative consequences. I have no problem saying I love the idea and goal of the group, but it could be *so* much better if it was less extreme. It has had a huge influence on secular homeschoolers far outside the community, and I can't count the number of times I have heard "well x,y,and z isn't *really* secular cause SEA says so" in other forums.