1 posted on
03/05/2007 5:19:13 AM PST by
SJackson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
To: SJackson
Proof of the need of home schooling.
2 posted on
03/05/2007 5:20:55 AM PST by
Dustbunny
(The BIBLE - Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth)
To: SJackson
Parents damn sure DO have a say in what their children are taught, especially when it comes to queers.
3 posted on
03/05/2007 5:24:28 AM PST by
stm
(Believe 1% of what you hear in the drive-by media and take half of that with a grain of salt)
To: SJackson
Under the Constitution Your Honor, under the Constitution, there is no compulsory education and there are no public schools.
To: SJackson
The constitutional right of parents to raise their children does not include the right to restrict what a public school may teach their children. Under the Constitution public schools are entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy.So this is why Montgomery County Schools are now teaching 8th graders about the joys of anal sex.
This judge is a moron - and obviously a liberal (they so often go hand-in-hand).
Teach the Ten Commandments - something VERY useful in life and in becoming "productive citizens" (don't murder, no adultery, etc.) - no doubt this judge would strike the program down.
6 posted on
03/05/2007 5:29:04 AM PST by
69ConvertibleFirebird
(Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.)
To: DaveLoneRanger; 2Jedismom; Aggie Mama; agrace; Antoninus; arbooz; bboop; blu; cgk; ...
ANOTHER REASON TO HOMESCHOOL
This ping list is for the "other" articles of interest to homeschoolers about education and public school. If you want on/off this list, please freepmail me. The main Homeschool Ping List by DaveLoneRanger handles the homeschool-specific articles.
8 posted on
03/05/2007 5:31:12 AM PST by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: SJackson
"The constitutional right of parents to raise their children does not include the right to restrict what a public school may teach their children," Wolf unambiguously wrote in dismissing a suit by two Lexington, Mass. Taxation without representation.
The parents sure do have a say. It's their tax money that's funding the schools and it's their children who are being educated there.
There's so much wrong with his ruling that it would take pages to refute it.
9 posted on
03/05/2007 5:34:10 AM PST by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: wagglebee
11 posted on
03/05/2007 5:35:02 AM PST by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: SJackson
Okay, so we MUST send our children to school, and that school can teach anything it pleases?
I think that judge is a good candidate for superglue and foam rubber.
To: SJackson
"Under the Constitution public schools are entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy"
And where in the constitution does it even say that the state is responsible for educating children?
Idiot. We are, or were, a republic, not a democracy.
To: SJackson
And the Constitution does not give any judge the right to say what a school can teach. That is left to "We the People" But then who cares what the Constitution says: NOT any Federal Judge that I have read about lately.
24 posted on
03/05/2007 6:11:51 AM PST by
YOUGOTIT
(56 Supporters of al Qaeda are seated in the US Senate)
To: SJackson
Wolf unambiguously wrote in dismissing a suit by two Lexington, Mass. couples,,,,,
Massachusetts?
Why am I not surprised!
27 posted on
03/05/2007 6:15:52 AM PST by
TYVets
(God so loved the world he didn't send a committee)
To: SJackson
"Plaintiffs may attempt to persuade others to join them in electing a Lexington School Committee that will implement a curriculum . . . more compatible with their beliefs." ( Judge Wolf)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In other words, the biggest political bully gets to destroy the most precious religious, political, and cultural values of other people's children.
Great! Isn't this a recipe for revolution?
Government schools are a violation of freedom of conscience. They have **never** been religiously, politically, or culturally neutral. They haven't, can't, and never will be. It is axiomatic. The education of children is **NEVER** neutral! ( Yes! I am shouting!)
Government schools are **compulsory**! That means armed police, courts, and foster care workers have the government power to make the life of parents and children a living hell.
Government schools are also a price-fixed monopoly making private school choice scarce and expensive. Then when parents, who are bankrupted by high taxes, can not find an affordable private school, or afford one, the government gives these parents a choice: Government school or prison. Some choice! ( eyeroll) I call it the Godfather's offer that can't be refused.
Then once government get children into its government indoctrination centers, it proceeds to destroy the most precious religious, political, and cultural beliefs of some children, while establishing the religion, cultural, and politics of others. Establish? Hm...don't our state and federal constitutions have something to say about "establishment" of religion?
Solution: Get your children **out** of government schools! Encourage everyone you know or meet to do the same. Then organize with parents to elect representatives who will turn off the government school money plug.
Government schools need 2 things: students and money. Starve them of both! It is possible to shut down these centers of ignorance, and socialist, pro-homosexual, anti-constitutional, anti-American, pro-pagan, anti-Christian, pro-mother earth worshiping, Marxist indoctrination.
To: SJackson
"The constitutional right of parents to raise their children does not include the right to restrict what a public school may teach their children," Wolf unambiguously wrote in dismissing a suit by two Lexington, Mass. couples who objected to lessons the local elementary school was teaching their children. "Under the Constitution public schools are entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy." If this ends up being upheld by the supreme court then it SHOULD be the point at which we discard public education. Shut down all the schools, give vouchers or just stop taking the taxes or a combination of the two. People can place their children in what is certain to be a better educational environment than public schools.
29 posted on
03/05/2007 6:19:26 AM PST by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: SJackson
"Under the Constitution public schools are entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy." It's been a while since I've read it but I don't remember anything in the Constitution about 'public schools' or 'teaching'.
30 posted on
03/05/2007 6:21:06 AM PST by
Rummyfan
(Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
To: SJackson
Is this just for the state of Massachusetts? Only for public schools though right? I am trying to decide where to send my Kinder gardener next year. It may just be home. It gets scarier and scarier to have kids these days.
33 posted on
03/05/2007 6:26:48 AM PST by
spotbust1
(Gun control is when you use both hands.)
To: SJackson
Government schools are evil.
To: SJackson
Judge Wolf cites the US Constitution as the authority for the state to "educate"/indoctrinate the children of citizens in whatever manner the state chooses?
Judge Wolf seems to be manufacturing another "right" for the government out of thin air. Using his own interpretive gymnastics and convoluted logic, he has, in effect, illegally amended the Constitution to make it say something that cannot be found anywhere in the text. In so doing, he has blatently stolen the right of parents to educate their own children and transfered that right to the government.
This type of government power is common to dictatorships. Our Constitution was designed to limit government power, not enhance it. Once again, as in the years prior to our revolution, the inalienable rights of the common man are being trampled by government dictators. This time they are not wearing red coats, Nazi Swastikas, or red stars, but the black robes of our own judiciary.
It is obvious that our Constitution alone will never protect us from the assaults of dictators like Judge Wolf. Such unprincipled men, when placed in positions of power, consistently twist the words of the Constitution to make it say anything they want. At this time, the only recourse of resistance available to the common man is the ballot box. We elect government officials who, in turn, appoint men to the bench. When many of these men turn out to be tyrants like Judge Wolf, who rape our Constitution at will, the common citizen, by himself, is powerless to legally resist.
The angry frustration of abused citizens is growing to explosive levels. Our elected officials should take note. They need to do something about these tyrants on the bench soon.
36 posted on
03/05/2007 6:36:41 AM PST by
Orca
To: SJackson
Parents should immediately sue for the right to school choice.
38 posted on
03/05/2007 6:41:18 AM PST by
.cnI redruM
(Liberals NEVER measure the consequences of their actions, only the personal political advantages.)
To: SJackson
40 posted on
03/05/2007 6:47:03 AM PST by
A. Pole
(Kwarcowy: "Non cogito ergo sum!")
To: SJackson
Remember the whole point of government schools is to indoctrinate the next generation. It is not about education, and really has never been since the Prussian model.
49 posted on
03/05/2007 7:16:36 AM PST by
redgolum
("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson