Posted on 11/18/2005 7:33:41 AM PST by TaxRelief
Of course, that would reflect badly on those august anti-American, Leftist institutions, now wouldn't it?
To my eyes it looks as if the writer is trying to tie together homeschooling and the acts of the murderer. And, of course, journalism isn't objective. We all have a prevailing bias and point of view. The key is to understand your bias and make sure that it doesn't cloud your judgment. The reason journalists are often so arrogantly dimwitted, however, comes from their own prevailing bias that they are somehow "objective" and "above the fray," thereby fooling themselves (and only themselves, most of the time) into thinking that they are sole gatekeepers of the public trust. The New York Times has no idea how much respect it could earn simply by admitting that they're leftwing radicals who support the Democrats - they might be wrong, but they'd be honest. Not that I expect honesty any time soon.
homeschool ping
Both were homeschooled and, according to some media reports, "deeply Christian."
Funny how it's not according to the families' pastors, friends, neighbors, aunts, uncles, gardeners, or mailmen...according to the media. And we all know the media doesn't have an agenda, don't we?
Ah; so one pictures reporters interviewing other reporters. There are crude terms for such an activity.
Dan
Maybe he was homeschooled because he could not handle life in public or private schools-- homeschooling does not make someone emotionally ill, but a lot of dysfunctionals have to stay home.
I don't think reporting the fact that both kids (minor and not minor) were homeschooled was unfair.
Being "deeply" anything is a red flag that someone has substituted a creed for good judgment. No good will come of it - even if the individual never goes so far as to commit murder.
I don't think reporting that the kids were homeschooled was unfair either. That was just one more factor that was not the norm in the story. It certainly doesn't mean that homeschooling in general contributed to the cause of the crimes.
Some children are homeschooled because they cannot learn in a traditional school setting for a variety of reasons, from having learning disabilities to being autistic. Their parents have found that they can teach them, and so they do.
Some children (hopefully very few) are kept home from school to babysit siblings, to hide abuse, or because of antisocial behavior. These families are not among those I would consider to be homeschoolers, no matter how they are labeled or who does the labeling. The reason is that the education of the children is not the primary reason for their being homeschooled.
A friend of mine knows another homeschooling family whose teenagers sit around all day and play video games and fool around on the computer. These teens are not taught anything. She knows this because the family lived with her best friend's family for a few months and the best friend saw no schooling going on for that entire time.
This family may call themselves a homeschooling family, but I do not. Being kept home from a traditional school is not, in itself, homeschooling.
Boy, I'm getting far afield from the topic here. Sorry about the soapboxing. It's just that there is a difference between an actual homeschooler and someone who is faking it.
Homeschooling is difficult, expensive, and time-consuming and like anything else, it has its drawbacks. We parents are cognizant of the drawbacks and do our best to compensate for them. We believe that the benefits of homeschooling outweigh the drawbacks.
For my family, at least, if the drawbacks outweighed the benefits, we would no longer homeschool. My husband and I re-evaluate this continually, as we want the best for our children.
I suppose my point is that not everyone who says they are homeschooling is actually doing so, and that would include those families for which little schooling actually takes place.
I wonder where Ludwig found the time to carry out his psychopathic ventures and his online babbling, socializing with his friends, and working at Circuit City, if he was really being homeschooled at the time he murdered Kara's parents. Becoming educated is very time-consuming.
Just my opinion.
How did I miss that?
Both were homeschooled and, according to some media reports, "deeply Christian."
Why do I keep hearing that little still voice asking why a Christian would violate the Commandment "Honor thy father and thy Mother".
Deeply mired in deep doodoo perhaps. "Deeply Christian" - I don't think so.
The observation I have, having seen both of their xanga pages, is that they both talked the talk, about being homeschooled and about being deeply Christian. Comparing what they did to what they wrote is where the disconnect happens.
Perhaps they were 'good kids' at some point before last week, but what this incident shows is that people can go off the edge of reason over hormones and love and broken hearts and not getting your way... That happens all the time... to all kinds.
So let me get this straight. It is not unexpected when English as a Second Language students commit murder.
The fact that he was home-schooled is a total non-issue with me. There are great public schools and crappy ones. Conversely there are great home-school situations and crappy ones. Some would make the arguement the public schools are worse, more of them, etc. But at the end I shrug and say "so what?" If the kid was prone to this type of violence where he was schooled would make no difference.
I don't know. It seems to me that if the reason homeschooling was featured was it's 'unusualness' in producing murderers, then that should have been the thrust of the story. A decent journalist, if truly making that point, might have done his research and provided some statistics like, this is the first known murder by a homeschooler in the state. Or, of all murders, virtually none are committed by homeschoolers. So this one really stands out.
Instead, we had a hit-and-run on homeschoolers.
Many of David's blog comments refer to having to get his school work done, but none of his comments reference his parents or siblings, etc.
It looks like he was doing what he was supposed to be doing, BUT that he was lonely and left to his own devices most of the time. We know that deep, intense loneliness in teens can result in suicide or running away.
I don't expect that of journalists in general.
Well, I'm not sure how lonely he was, but it sure sounds like his family didn't pay much attention to him. I think he is a psychopath.
"According to some media reports..."...whenever I read those words, something begins to stink.
Homeschooling is only one factor here. Whether homeschooled or not, sometimes kids raised under highly authoritarian parents will rebel. Some of those rebellious kids will rebel openly, and some silently or secretly. Could that be a significant factor in the case under discussion? IMO, yes.
Let's also look at a somewhat related issue, that of the behavior of PKs, Preacher's Kids. I have no statistics to based this on, but my observations over the past 20 years indicates that PKs will go in one of two directions - they will either be Godly or devilish. I'm not saying this happens with 100% of the PKs, but rather a high percentage.
Comments?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.