“FYI, speaking of special education, with homeschooling, all education can be 'special" - that is, tailored to the student (and teacher to some degree). "Special Ed" covers a lot of ground, and many students not technically classified as such still need specialized and/or personalized help in order for them to truly succeed academically. It's a hard thing to fulfill in the present top-down managed education environment which is trending towards scripted education. People are not all the same as to how they learn best. Educating is more art-form than many would like to admit. Some think the magic answer is establishing some national testing standard, when the answer is probably closer to allowing teachers the latitude to teach in flexible ways that are appropriate to their students. But that will never fit with a subject time-script.”
“I imagine it's tough teaching with such budget limitations. If I were more familiar with Louisiana, I might understand why this is like this.
Here in Iowa, the amount spent for education per million in population ($3.3B) is a bit more (17%) than Louisiana ($2.82B). But we have none of those types of curriculum shortages anywhere that I know of. Teachers are paid well (sometimes too well IMO) and the outcomes are pretty good. But we have a lot of rural that does not have as much of the social challenges of inner city environments. Much of our state lives in unlocked house areas where neighbors are nice to one another (even if we have different political affiliations). Although we have a very high Caucasian population percentage, most people could care less what ethnic background someone is.
Even with decent schools in the area, we chose to homeschool simply because we wanted to teach and raise our children instead of turning them over to others to raise every day. It was both rewarding and challenging. It also meant a big reduction in income, since we could not both work as much. We understand educating on a tight budget.
Thanks for your years of work to try and help children get a sound academic start. I encounter people all the time that fell through the cracks in the public system and lack the confidence and foundation to go on to college. We often try and help and encourage.”
“I spent quite a lot of time trying to find references to what charter school or schools actually used the 1991 version for that book, but couldn't find that info - but I did try.
I am pretty familiar with BJU's material, having used some along with lots of other stuff, over the years. The earlier stuff I found to be lacking substance. But I know one young man that a friend of ours homeschooled using earlier BJU material amongst other things that now works as an engineer for NASA. (And their ethnic makeup would likely preclude them from KKK membership.)
I am very science oriented, into molecular biology and gene expression. My children are too, with two in college (honors), one for nursing and the other heading in the med school direction, respectively. We homeschooled and our two oldest kids about a year and a half ahead of their age-peers. We are far from average in the academic area and science in particular.
The latest BJU high school science material is actually quite good and advanced, but is still theistic, as you might expect from a Christian curriculum. Keep in mind that many of the "fathers" of science disciplines were devout theists (Newton, Kepler, Gallileo, Mendel, Leuwenhoek, Linnaeus, Planck, etc.). Not only did their faith not inhibit them from making great scientific discoveries, it was in some cases, the foundation of their inquiry.
BTW, I still love the "Comes Alive" album, but did not use it as curriculum. ;-)”
Candide33 on Jun 3, 2014 at 04:10:57
“That''s funny, my daughter is an epidemiologist and like most research scientist she teaches at a university, she teaches molecular genetics and microbiology for pre-med and she says that home schooled students are rarely ever good candidates for medical school. Most flunk out the first semester.
I taught my daughter to read at age 4 and by age 5 she was reading the newspaper to her grandfather every day, no need for home school which often leads to poor social skills. One of her home schooled students actually made the national news for making a scene in public!
I spent 10 years teaching in a private school for special education students. The state would send us home schooled students all the time and pay us to take them because they were so far behind that they could never be put in class with students their own age.
The latest BJU stuff is garbage, just like it has always been and all real educators will tell you the same.
I am old.... I have seen so much first hand...I never hid in my house or hid my children away from the world that they would have to live in one day.. I made sure they were prepared and more than capable of handling anything.
Your statement about scientists is lifted straight out of right wing religious propaganda so nothing you ever say can be taken seriously, if you want to be taken seriously, don't mention that stuff.”
“BTW, although I am not of the same political persuasion, I have always respected Bernie Sanders, and found him to be one of the more honest and straightforward people that have held office in D.C. The same for Kucinich. I am anti-war (although there is a time for it in genuine defense) and anti-corruption. Although supporting a strong national defense, I am not a fan of the military industrial complex. I do not think government should be supporting corporations directly. I am pro civil liberties. I think there needs to be reasonable and meaningful accountability with charter schools just as there should be for public schools.
On these matters, and likely others, we might actually significantly agree. Just because we might disagree on other areas of life, politics and living, does not make us each other's enemy, ignorant, or hateful. In many places there are people devoting their lives to make their charter school a great educational environment for the children that attend there. But that doesn't seem to fit in the picture for you. You might consider whether looking at things through a social-conflict lens always provides a proper perspective.”
“Hate? Because I asked if you had any verification for what you posted? I don't hate you, I don't know you. Behind the aggressive online persona, you may be a truly nice person in the flesh.
I was born to two brilliant public school educators and was reading college level by first grade. You don't know me and I don't think you know enough about me to know if I am ignorant on any subject, or a hater. You resorted to name calling in your response instead of simply producing the evidence for your claims that any honest, diligent person would require.
I am not a charter school advocate (or expert), but I do not think using lies and unsubstantiated claims should be utilized in consideration of a subject important to all of us.
I read the links, and about 30 others where the material was also posted and found no source links or verification in any of them. It looks like people were looking for something to slander charter schools with and found (or fabricated) some obscure material that the schools were not even using.
Textbook adoption is the thing I was asking you for proof of. If you have no proof, have the honesty to say that you have not checked it out for yourself. If what you are so outraged by is actually false, you might want to tone down your dislike of the people who are working in the charter school front.”
Candide33 on Jun 2, 2014 at 15:33:56
“I gave you proof and you chose to ignore it and if you really cared you would look it up yourself.
I retired in 2006 and the eighth grade English textbook that we were still using had pop culture sentences that included references to PETER FRAMPTON!
Don't tell me about Louisiana schools, I spent my life fighting for better textbooks and schools here.....and I held the BJU textbooks in my hand in the textbook depository for the state while I was on the textbook adoption committee for my school. The information in them never changes!!! They still said that no one knows where electricity comes from it was just a gift from god in the fourth grade science book.
You may have gone to a school in a rich neighborhood but schools in poor states do not even have enough books for each student to have one! My students could not do homework because they could not bring the textbooks home and we were only allowed enough copies on the copy machine to make one copy of tests for each student a month. I often spent my own money making copies at Kinkos just so my students could have a spelling list or study sheet!
I spent years studying the effects of poverty on special education students around the world, most of my continuing education coursework was on that subject. I don't have my college textbooks or journal articles handy to make you a copy.”
“Candide - Do you verify anything that you read? The article on politicsusa.com does not say the book they are quoting from is used in any of the charter schools. I do not have a copy of the supposed 1991 BJU Press textbook, so I cannot verify it is accurate. But I can say that it is EXTREMELY doubtful that a 1991 version of ANY textbook is being used as the primary history text in any charter school in the country. Since the current version from BJU press is the fourth edition, why do you suppose they are supposedly quoting from the 1991 version?
This stuff about these books has been parroted around the liberal web without anyone caring whether it is accurate. Note the lack of mention of ANY specific charter school that is actually using these books. I doubt they exist. These books are for Christian schools. Charter schools are not private Christian schools.
Can you provide one single Louisiana charter school that you know for sure uses the 1991 BJU book as a textbook, and do you have knowledge of anyone actually checking to see if the quotes are even true?
This is simple hate motivated lies. Disagree on policy if you want, but stick to verified facts.
As far as corruption is concerned, it's pretty deep in the government education establishment and the federal level of almost anything. You are aware that Huff Post is a private, non governmentally owned entity. Does that make it corrupt?”
Candide33 on Jun 2, 2014 at 12:58:58
“I see that you do not even know basic definitions of words so it will be extremely difficult if not impossible to explain anything to you.
You know nothing about education or textbook adoption or charter schools or Louisiana so take your hate and your ignorance and be on your merry way.
The intelligent people, the people who are not completely clueless like yourself understood and were capable of reading the links. You seem to be the only one with an agenda here.”
“Good point. The diversity of the arrangement between charter schools, state or local government entities and school districts makes it harder to make a sound comparison of charter vs. regular public school outcomes. Not only do charters vary, but "public government" schools are not run differently from state to state and district to district depending on the flexibility and independence allowed to public schools around the country.
My point was that regardless of who runs charter schools, they are providing an open public service of education, just as traditional public schools do. They are no less "public" just because they may be operated by private companies. The idea that things are "public" only if they are owned and run by the government is a false paradigm. Things are public if they provide a free publicly accessible service. Facebook owns and operates a public service. It is profit making (or losing) just as Huff Post is. Nevertheless, anyone can use them at no charge.
I am aware of the difference between profit seeking entities and governmental entities, but government seeks money just as "for-profits" do. But just because something is run by a for-profit does not mean it is not run with the public good in mind. Humans are able to bring multiple motivations and principles to bear in the process of doing things. This is why there can be, and are, some greedy covetous operators of non-profits, altruistic operators of for-profits, and power and money hungry people running governmental entities.”
“"oh wait there are no public schools to unload those students on."
That's not true. Charter schools ARE public schools. They simply aren't run by the government. There is nothing automatically virtuous about government run anything, or privately run either. The big difference is that the private operators have to compete in order to continue to be utilized, while the government doesn't, at least form a year to year perspective. This fact alone should be considered a contributor to the rot and sloth-like rate of response to systemic inadequacy in many of the government run school systems around the country.”
Candide33 on Jun 1, 2014 at 11:51:13
“hahaah who do you think you are kidding.. they sell those charters to anyone with the money to buy one, they have sold them to convicted criminals and even pedophiles in New Orleans... almosst all of them have gone to religious freaks who teach that the KKK is just a great group of guys who set up a social club and that Loch Ness monster is real and proof that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs .... I bet you think I am kidding?
Privatization is just another word for corruption.
Anyone who thinks charter schools are anything but way to steal taxpayer money is living in Lala land.”
Jeff Swope on May 31, 2014 at 07:24:13
“That is not entirely accurate about charter schools not being run by the government. It depends on what the charter says. This article misrepresents the word "charter". Not all charter schools are run by a private entity. A charter school means that it will have its own independent charter which makes it a separate entity from all of the schools surrounding it. It can still be run by the district which its in. What I mean by that is that district policies can still apply, and district human resources can still be called in when there is a problem. It all depends on what the charter says.”
aznurse on May 31, 2014 at 04:29:06
“I hope it works out better than the privatized prison systems.”
“At our level of technology and science, it is impossible to deal with the amount of natural variables, even with a super-comp. All we can do is in, put data in, and get output. The outcomes will not show predictable facts, but rather, how the math formulas were designed. We do not have the ability to show detailed predictable causation in either weather or climate, big-picture wise.
But why ignore other key principles? How about the long established principle of vegetation growth acceleration (on land and in sea) in response to higher CO2 levels, thus counteracting CO2 output towards equilibrium? How about the fact that CO2 input to O2 output conversion by photosynthesis is accelerated in higher temps, and more land mass becoming vegetation viable also increases natural CO2 remediation? They way some speak, its as if there is no significant natural system that deals with CO2 equilibrium, which, of course, is bunk.
If CO2 as "pollution" was really such a threat, why would they not constantly mention the PRIMARY process that massively deals with CO2 every day? Why would they not be urging planting trees and planting new-growth crops on non developed land that is not remediating CO2 much at all? Why? Because that would not yield new grant money for the atmospheric "science" departments around the world, and would not yield massive new taxation, regulation and control over peoples lives.
What's really tragic is how this shell-game of pseudo-facts, is robbing real environmental problems of funding and attention.”
“Well, at least you have the eyes to see design. Much of the skepticism regarding the Bible and associated faith assumes that the things that God did to make himself clearly known to those whom he chose, never happened. Bu that is an assumption lacking evidence. I have plenty of personal experience walking with God and seeing his power and love to know that he exists. There is no question regarding God's existence for me.
I never mentioned magic - you did. Magic has nothing to do with God's ability or actions. The simple fact that his way and abilities are way beyond our own level of understanding, is simply a fact. But that does not make them "magic", they just seem so from the perspective of some people. "Terraforming" is not a word used in the Bible, but it was not a vocabulary word or concept understandable to those who it was given to. Still, we have no idea how that could actually occur, and as we have no ability to actually do it, any fantasy of how it could be done is pretty "magical" to us.
But if you read Genesis 1, its not hard to see it as a very simplistic (and therefore, not technologically accurate) conveyance of that very idea regarding the earth. The "how" regarding how any of it was accomplished is not given - the focus of Genesis 1 is about purposes, not details of methodology.”
“But Tyson is lying that he doesn't normally address things like this. he does. He also knows very well that Young earth creationism are only one view among those who believe that what we view in the cosmos is designed, but does not properly state this to be true. Many holding Judeo-Christian religious faith believe in the integrity of the sacred texts, but do not think they in any way require a reading of a 6500 year old earth. Actually, many believe this is a false way to read it and that the biblical evidence supports a different view.
The contributions to science of theistic believers is massive. Personally, it was growth in knowledge of genetics that caused me to deeply reconsider the validity of the theory of evolutionary origins of life. (Which is not the same as micro evolution or species adaptation, or even species divergence.) As a former Christian skeptic, I have difficulty understanding how people can say they know of no evidence of God's existence. Besides all of what scripture has to say, we are surrounded and immersed in his handiwork. (Although he does not control everything, a point that should be obvious.) The human DNA molecule is an almost unimaginably massive molecular database containing exceedingly high level data and programming regarding life, its structure, its construction and diversity mechanisms. The molecule is made up of over 204 billion atoms. You have to abandon logic to believe it was anything but designed originally.”
MaineIndependant on Apr 1, 2014 at 22:12:27
“I don't doubt that DNA was designed. I do doubt that it was designed by the same being that created the universe. In the billions of years since the big bang, I believe it is highly likely that an uncountable number of civilizations have risen and fallen. Ours is just the one residing in this part of the Milky Way galaxy at this point in time. I find it far more likely that the planet Earth was terraformed by a long removed race of beings who helped foster our progress towards self-awareness. There is an equal amount of literature that supports this theory as their are books in the modern bible, and it would go a long way towards explaining similarities in ancient multi-deity religions around the world. The difference between your view and mine is mine doesn't rely on magic. Human beings were likely engineered to be beasts of burden until such a point that our self-awareness could no longer be denied. And now you know why scientists have historically be hunted down and killed by religious leaders around the world. By questioning the existence of God, they introduce theories that actually make more sense, but can't be used to control people or accumulate wealth. Unless, of course, you count the perversion of the scientologists.”
“Gun ownership out here in rural Iowa is near 100%, including by progressive liberals. But our gun violence rates in rural Iowa is next to non-existent. Whether I can hear my neighbors target practicing from a mile away, or I can't makes no difference. We don't fear each other for having guns. We understand that we have them for hunting (if we hunt) or for potential self-defense. In our county, there are only a couple police on patrol duty in the entire county at night. It could be 30-45 minutes for a 911 response, unless another police came out of jurisdiction to us. But crime is minimal in the rural county area- almost non-existent, if you are not including OWI's, the occasional domestic dispute. Why is that? The highest percentage of gun ownership, more conservative, way less crime and less police than the cities which have less gun ownership, more liberal and more crime.
I imagine it may shatter the concept of rural life for some on this board, that we are all some sort of country bumpkins, ignorant, uneducated and taking pot shots at each other in ongoing multi-generational feuds. But the reality is, in many ways, it is a peaceful paradise here (weather notwithstanding) and we all get along as neighbors quite fine, regardless of our political affiliation, and our common practice of gun ownership.”
Dosadi on Mar 3, 2014 at 17:50:19
“Guns are not the problem. The problem is SOME of the people that have guns.”
“People do hunt with handguns...and air rifles, and bows and arrows, and slingshots, and nets, and traps, and hooks, and even with no hunting tools. But it may not occur to you, but people practice using their weapons, so they can hit what they shoot at, and can be familiar with them, so they can be used safely. And that practice, here in Iowa, is often done outdoors on private property. Lower noise would not be a bad thing from a "neighborly" perspective.
Also, besides hunting, have you not considered the fact that most people that have a handgun will never shoot anything living with them, yet they will "use" them via target practice and simply having for the potential use of self-defense.”
“I never said God was "invisible", or an "invisible friend" (even though I cannot presently "see" him). That's your straw man (perhaps intended to be offensive) argument, not mine. Nor have I contended that God has explained everything he knows to us. But your point about concepts is false. Your idea that concepts, principles that should govern activity could not be communicated from a more advanced creator to those he has created, is intellectual foolishness. If the creator made the, and he was indeed advanced in knowledge, then he would not only have the ability to communicate at a level they could understand, but also could intelligently be able to choose what level of information they could handle, understanding-wise. That it is wisdom and knowledge, only in part, does not negate the nature or quality of the information. And contrary to your suggestion that God has never spoke for himself, not only has he done so, but his principles, evidence of his existence as a loving creator, is embedded throughout the entirety of the creation, including the "star-stuff". You have to be blind not to see it if you have any depth of exposure to viewing the makeup of the cosmos and the natural world we live on. Regarding the thousands of religions thing, that does not refute the legitimacy of any single view, its only an observation that there are many paths (as the Bible clearly teaches). Yet, despite the many paths that have been erected and offered as competing options, it is”
CRandallB on Oct 19, 2013 at 21:46:42
“this is where your argument falls apart because this very statement says it all:
"IF the creator made the, and he was indeed advanced in knowledge, then
he would not only have the ability to communicate at a level they could
That's right: *IF* is the crux of the failure in your logic. You have no idea whether all of the stuff upon which you base the rest of your concept is actual or not. That *IF* destroys anything after it.
Like *IF* Einstein had some means of communication to the ant, then of course he'd be able to communicate--but we know that he does not--therefore, anything after that becomes moot/
I know you diodn't identify your concept as an "invisible friend" I did. However, it is NOT a strawman argument as you yourself admitted you have never actually SEEN or HEARD this presence yourself--therefore, it is indeed "invisible" and unprovable.
That you wish to inform the entirety of your life on an unprovable and unseeable and unknowable concept, to me, is ludicrous.
But then again, as long as your delusion causes no harm, I don't really care. It is when you decide to impose these fantasy thoughts about what an invisiblle friend tells you--you think--onto others--well, then, THAT becomes a problem.”
“I addressed the details of your post, that's "so what". Many Christians today do endeavor to follow the Torah's principles. I also commented on two errors in your comments regarding of the Bible. (No prohibition on cotton blends, and that the verse you mentioned had nothing to do with keeping someone from getting "into heaven".) Of course, you may not actually care about the accuracy of what you write and was only trying to slander Christians in general. If so, my mistake in responding.”
“You missed the point of the rape-hormone association. Few of us claim that people should be able to resist the hormonal leading to have sex with non-willing partners. If we are unable - commonly unable to resist hormonal, genetic and mental attraction impulses, then rape is justified, as it is simply a following of a natural impulse, and "resisting it", as you put it, is "simply not going to happen". But we all know that is not true. By choice, reason or lack of opportunity, there are millions of people that every day in this country, and billions or people globally, that choose not to have sex, or pursue having sex with people their are attracted to. You think people are simply animals, that have no way to control their impulses or thought patterns - its instinct first. I don't think that way. I believe, because of everything from simple observation, personal experience and science, that people can choose what they do, and despite genetics or previously established thought patterns and habits, can choose to act contrary to those habits, and even change them, as a primary habit pattern, if they choose to do so. FYI, most, what you would call heterosexual people, deal with the same issues, we are, at times, attracted to others sexually, sometimes strongly. Even in relationships, many people feel (although it contradicts the popular "wisdom" of our times") that sex will complicate a relationship by creating a bond between them and another, that they are not sure”
“For most of recorded history, including the early part of those country's history, marriage did not involve a civil contract of any kind. It was considered a personal, private and spiritual covenant. Marriage licensure is a relatively new invention and perspective when viewed from a broad historical view.
Marriage licensure in this country was instituted in some states in order to civilly control and prohibit interracial marriage.
Another key historical source of marriage licensure was when the government-run Church of England wanted to exercise more control over who married who and to derive revenue.”
"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her "
Eph 5:25 NIV
"Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them." - Col 3:19 NIV
"In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself." - Eph 5:28 NIV
"so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children", - Tts 2:4 NASB”
“You confuse human institutions, with the principles of scripture. Indeed, what people do, think and believe, may or may not reflect the scope of the Bible's instruction. The Bible does not teach against interracial marriage. It does teach against marrying a non-Christian, as Christian service together would be an obvious conflict.
And, I should mention that we still have slavery, we just don't call it that. (Contracts, taxation, imprisonment for a crime, mortgages, etc. all lay claim to the labor of another and bind it with conditions. That they are often entered into consensually, does not change the nature of the bonded labor nature of these things.) And now there is the "individual mandate" - another name for an ancient institution.”
Indifferent-Moderate on Oct 7, 2013 at 20:25:43
“Doesn't change the fact Conservatives were every bit against inner racial marriage as they are now against SSM. Right down to the exact same arguments. But now nearly all churches accept Inner racial marriage.
People who say Christianity has never changed are deluded in 10 years the church will deny they fought against SSM Just like they did in the 60's
They are exactly the (if not the same people racists and homophobes overlap especially in the south) that used the Bible to justify their racism. They lost every other battle conservatives (Slavery, Women voting, civil right ect) and they will lose SSM as well.”
“If the Bible reveals God's will, any of us have the ability to understand at least part of it, no "hubris" involved.
I should also mention that Einstein had the ability to communicate his ideas too, which is why many of his theories are still in play in science and physics today. You speak as if it is about us having a supernatural ability to understand God's will and thus it is deemed by you impossible. But why make God so small so as to make him incapable of communicating his will to those who he has created? Indeed, the one that designed a molecular database built of hundreds of billions of atoms (the DNA molecule), would have to simplify things considerably, but to say it is impossible is to deny the ability of someone with a complex understanding of subject to be able to communicate a simple version too. Perhaps it takes even more hubris to say that God could not (or has no right to) communicate his will to human kind.
I am sure you know that no one claims "complete understanding" of God, it is here, a concept injection of your own.”
CRandallB on Oct 7, 2013 at 21:48:39
“the use of the ant was indeed incorrect. In a comparison of man to the ultimate force in the universe, a molecule would be more apt. But, let's stick with the ant--Einstein could not communicate his concepts to an ant no matgter how hard he tried, because an ant is simply incapable of understanding any mode of communication he might try.
It is a refutation of personal option to decide that an invisible friend one couldn't possibly conceive gives us personal instruction upon which to base our lives.
There are literally thousands of religions on this planet, and the leaders of every one of them makes the same claim, often in absolute ignorance and willful denial of reality.
We are not the product of an invisible friend. We are of and by the universe itself. We are star stuff--that is our connection. But that takes work and study and effort to explore. Not "decrees" from some entity that never speaks for itself.”
“Hill: You are aware that there are Christians that are Sabbath observant, and which do not eat pork or shellfish.(There is no prohibition on wearing cotton blends in the Bible, that you do not understand the section and verse in question is a separate matter.)
And from a "reading is fundamental" , you might realize that in order for one to be "least in the Kingdom of Heaven", a person would have to be in the kingdom of heaven. This is not a prohibition on eternal life, although there are some of those in the scriptures as well.”
“"This issue was put to rest the first time when the ACA bill was made a law"
Absolutely not true, anything that requires ongoing funding is subject to the appropriations of the House of Representative. The framers placed the power of the purse in the hands of the elected representatives most accountable to the people, so they could stop things that the country was not substantially behind. The fact there is such division regarding this program should show you that it is NOT something that should be implemented on the federal/national level.
Why hitch your progressive wagon to a 1$7 trillion-in-debt, horrifically inefficient and corrupt federal nag, when you could instead implement this on the more fiscally sound, state level in progressive leaning states? You could then show by example, the true wisdom of your ways to the rest of us when cost-containment and inexpensive health care is sustained over time in those states, compared to the rest of us who would be suffering under capitalistic non-socialistic systems.
Why? I imagine, for more than a few progressives, is has a lot to do with the hate-driven desire to subjugate everyone else in the country that does not agree with them, by forcing policy and taxation on vast swaths of the country not desiring that type of civil rule. (Declaration of Independence anyone?)”
“Joaquin, Just because someone disagrees with another person's choice of behavior that they chose to make public, does not mean that they do not want good things for them. And yes, sexual behavior is a choice, for all people, regardless of "orientation" and regardless of how that orientation was arrived at.
Just because you may disagree with Christians on this issue does not mean you want bad things to happen to them.”