Replies

Funny. There was a time, not so long ago, when NO ONE worried about hearing "we" in reference to our citizenship in our state and our nation.

Now, crackpots and extreme America-haters take every opportunity to equate national pride, or pride in one's state or community, as "dangerous."

Get a life, you weirdos.

...these priceless resources...

That's the phrase I find obnoxious. The implication is clearly that the children are not free human beings, entrusted in the care of their parents, but state "resources" to be used for the benefit of the state.

That's about as un-American as it can get.

Tom, I think your reply was right on target.

Illbay, it's because Tom has a life and doesn't want statist busybodies managing it for him that he wrote the reply. How about you?

Socialism is the theory; cannibalism is the practice.

Teach your children to disrespect wrongful authority.

Whaddya got? The Soylent Green Franchise???

Funny. There was a time, not so long ago, when NO ONE worried about hearing "we" in reference to our citizenship in our state and our nation.

Now, crackpots and extreme America-haters take every opportunity to equate national pride, or pride in one's state or community, as "dangerous."

I am a big fan of mediating institutions, covenantal entities, such as family, church, and civic order. As a Trinitarian Christian, I worship a God who is simultaneous One and Three. Since God Himself exemplifies community, this must be an important dimension of life!

I object, however, to the bipolar weltanschuung of the statists. Their world view recognizes only two realities -- the State, and the individual. For a statist, civil government exactly equals "society." Any other units must meekly find their place in the greater whole, the Great Society (LBJ), the Great Community (John Dewey).

I find a sense of community in family and in church, as well as in neighborhood. Does this help clarify matters?

There was a time, not so long ago, when NO ONE worried about hearing "we" in reference to our citizenship in our state and our nation.

There was a time, not so long ago, when NO ONE would use "citizenship" as a euphemism for collectivism.

Comerade.

His use of "we" obviously excludes the parents of those 38,000 children: it is as if he wishes to use the coercion of the state-the "we"- to impose his standards and ideas on education and child rearing upon the disenting parents-which, by the way, oversee their children. The state does not have title to these children. This man expresses his intent, by force I would suppose, to remove "them" and bring them to "us", that is, the state, the majority as he so gleefully would have us know. He's the crackpot-socialism and Marxism were never uncracked!