Comments on: German Homeschooling Familly Granted Asylum In The United States

By: fuster

fuster — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:45:11 +0000

Tom, GL, thanks.

By: Tom Lehner

Tom Lehner — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:37:07 +0000

Fuster, I come to the point where I would rather sit in a nice restaurant with the both of you, drink a bottle of Merlot, and discuss this topic to ’till dawn.

You are right, GL is right and I am right and truth of the matter is that the only reason we seem to have a missunderstanding is the fact that we write instead of talk.

As far as the Abortion – you are right and I can not repeat what I said here in public. Unfortunately and to my horror like shock my sister thought that was ok.

As far as the evolution thing goes. I think I have made my self missunderstood.

Scientists and non believers may consider (other than me – for me is the bible the truth and word of god) the Bible a theory as well.

I pride myself to be a thinker and a person that asks questions but that is the difference between me and the European socialist schools. in public schools the bible is nothing but a better bed time story and the evolution theory is the ablsoute truth.

I want my son to be growing up in the word of God, become a good christian man, southern gentlemen and a thinker that finds happiness in sneaking through all my books and learn and ask questions. And at times he will ask about the Darwin theory. I am not oposed to him knowing about but I opose to downsizing the bible as it is done in public scools in germany and austria, in preference to diversity teachings.

Yes you are right sooner or later kids want to know more and you know what I love that my son asks and is willing to learn. I do that too, I am not a blindfolded christian but a man that asks and interprets.

By: GL

GL — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:19:45 +0000

Evolution is no more strongly-evidenced than the “simplistic theories” you excoriate. Faith is the core of evolution.

Name the strong evidence.

All of this is a distraction. If you read the brief from the Romeike’s they were persecuted and they fled before their children were removed. If you can read that and still say that the State is the better nanny conversation is pointles..

By: fuster

fuster — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:07:30 +0000

Tom, we’re happy to have you here, I’m sure.
But while I appreciate the patience, I doubt that I’m failing to understand the point that you and GL are making.
I understand it pretty well. I even agree with it to the extent that I thought it my parental duty to have my wife and I assume the bulk of our children’s education in their early years.

But I simply can’t agree with the notion that it’s ethically sound to attempt to keep your children from hearing ideas that differ from those that you hold.
The older the children get, the more unsavory the attempt becomes.
Teaching children that abortion is a necessity is obviously heinous and I harbor doubt that you’re properly conveying what was being taught.
Teaching evolution is not teaching religion, Tom. It is teaching a strongly-evidenced scientific theory that contradicts some simplistic theories of religious literalism.
Contradiction of a tenet of some theory is not positing an entire alternative.

By: Tom Lehner

Tom Lehner — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:58:44 +0000

Fuster, thought GL does a marvelous Job in being patient and trying to explain that to you, you are missing the bottom point here and the topic, fact is: Chilren of course should here all sides and all póssibilities and make up their own mind. right, but also bottom line is that in public schools and especially in Germany/Austria (I know that becasue that is where I was born – I am a naturalizd american citizen) the darwin theory is considered the only thruth and religious part is downsized to a non existing point. Bottom line, GL is right the school is responsible in teaching children intelectual basics and it is up to the parents to teach them morals and values. Modern day school rather teach kids “Public opinion Values” or to use Obama’s words – indoctrinate the youth to liberalism and accaptance of sick and unmoral behavior. Every opostition or any other teaching like conservative points of fews will be washed away by the public school and we, or better I am, afraid that with those pseudo liberal teachings my son loses the line of a moral vlaued living. Lets face it, in early yout years they are formed and who want to rather form the kids? Is it me and to pass on my values or the liberal schools and their non-existing morals. Darwin is a theory but the schools sees it as religion.
Just for example, my sister sent me an email in 2008, the Austrian secretary of Health was personally passing on Condoms in school to children between 8 and 12 and explain the proper use of it and how to get public funded Abortion in case that thing aint working. Now this is not the values I want to teach my kids – God bless I am in Texas,

By: GL

GL — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:21:56 +0000

nope. name 1 element of evolution which is provable and verifiable and not faith-based.

evolution is taught constantly from grade zero (watched a TV show about animals for three year olds lately?)

By: fuster

fuster — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:18:20 +0000

evolution is not a religion. that’s silly, GL.
if you mean that evolution contradicts your religious ideas, that’s one thing, but that hardly makes evolution an alternate religion.

Again I get no direct answer, merely a vague grumbling that the schools must only teach what you find acceptable.

But speaking of evolution, isn’t that taught to high school students?
Is your plan that high school children must not hear things that you deny?

By: GL

GL — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:06:42 +0000

you’re ignoring my comment that teaching by a State-sponsored school is not morally neutral.

if it were simply about interacting with children, there would be no issue. I go back to my comment about “science” curriculum. It is not value-neutral. Teaching evolution is not value neutral. It’s teaching a state-sponsored religion(one case in point).

By: fuster

fuster — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:55:55 +0000

why do you persist in repeating the question about the state? I’ve answered it and it becomes hard to understand that you’re being serious when you continue with it.
the main point of primary education is reading, writing and arithmetic and interacting with other children.
what’s the objection? I’ve asked that and you’ve not really answered.

By: GL

GL — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:00:29 +0000

and why is the state *the* preferred entity to give them a different point of view?

there’s a lot of talk about “thinking out of the box” these days and the need for people who can do that to take future generations to the next level across all facets of productive human activity. Were the movers and shakers of the Renaissance state-schooled? The premise of state education seems rather modern and rather well-boxed.

Allan Bloom did a great job of describing the condition of being so open-minded you become closed. I call it moral analysis paralysis. Others would call it depravity.