# HSLDA is at it again



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=38855

How does this help the HS communities? Especially the ones who are doing this for Educational reasons or are secular
after all the time they have spent trying to show that not everyone who hs is a religious zealot ???


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

HUH? HSLDA is made up of religious zealots

personally I think it's great, I hope it makes more people see the light as to the real purpose of this organization.


----------



## pamamidwife (May 7, 2003)

I'm with you on the worry about HSLDA. It worries me. Big time.


----------



## PurpleBasil (Jan 28, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
HUH? HSLDA is made up of religious zealots

personally I think it's great, I hope it makes more people see the light as to the real purpose of this organization.

ITA with both statements.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Quote:

May God show us and our children in the years ahead how we can use His formula for blessing to bring about a widespread return to God's principles in our nation.
HSLDA

If you read through their website HSLDA has always promoted Godly principles along with perserving parents rights, and the freedom to homeschool in this country. I too think christian parents should think twice before they send their children to government schools to be indoctrinated with a worldview.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

SQ, to use a common analogy I wouldn't eat some wonderfully prepared gourmet dinner if it had chunks of dog crap in it.

Even if HSLDA is 90% good the 10% crap they're promoting (whipping babies and small children) negates any good.

Not only that they SHAME THE GOSPEL by misrepresenting Jesus' teachings and the Scriptures.

Debra Baker


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

I have to disagree DB. You'll have to provide proof of your statement or you are merely slandering a good organization.


----------



## Pam_and_Abigail (Dec 2, 2002)

As an ex-christian, I consider myself somewhat familiar with the idea of 'sin', but fail to see how sending your kids to public school equates or is worse than adultery or drugs. I mean, I think public schools are bad, and as a pagan, my views on the other may differ, but as I recall from an earlier time in my life, drugs and adultery would be seen as much worse by a level-headed christian. Am I wrong? (not that I'm accusing the people in the article of being level-headed!  )


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=137630

Note the last couple of pages.

db


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Debra---

I think that SQ is pro-corporal punishment. ?


----------



## Kinipela79 (Apr 8, 2003)

Quote:

I wouldn't eat some wonderfully prepared gourmet dinner if it had chunks of dog crap in it.
I'm going to have to remember this one!!

I agree, any organization that will twist the bible to make it acceptable and common place to whip/spank/train babies and children. I just can't picture Jesus walking around whacking little children for one thing!







I think the article just shows that they are religious zealots and hopefully when/if people make the choice to homeschool they will stay FAR away from them!


----------



## brandywine (Mar 25, 2004)

I'm a Christian and I homeschool, but I also can't see the connection they're making here. Sending your kids to public school isn't a sin---it's a choice. And for some families, it's the best choice. Why can't we just choose what works for our families and get validated? I'm pretty sick of right wing fanatics being the 'face of homeschooling' anyway. Sick of them being the 'face of Christianity' too. Sick, sick, sick uke


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Db, have you ever read a magazine that advertised items you don't like. I have. If I read a magazine that advertise a product doesn't not mean that I approve of that product because I subscribe to a magazine with the product in it. That is the logic you are using when you say that HSLDA promotes "whipping babies". I don't personally know anybody who whips babies. That is just inflamatory exageration of something you don't agree with. I looked through the HSLDA site to see if I could find a statement that says we ought to be whipping babies.







Couldn't find one.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

SQ, they not only will not use their influence to stop that ad but I believe they are pro corporal punishment and (I believe) have "defended" parents' rights to beat their children.

DB


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

SQ, you might not say "whip" but perhaps sanatize it by "thump on the thigh" or "slap hands" or "take a little switch....." but substitute "whip" and you see what I mean.

Yes, I know people who advocate and practice using negative physical force on babies. I suspect you do as well.

DB


----------



## Kinipela79 (Apr 8, 2003)

DB - I believe that hslda refers to it as "loving physical discipline ". In the name of the Lord of course.


----------



## grnbn76 (Mar 3, 2004)

What really ticks me off is that these people give me (and others like me) a bad name.
Not everyone homeschools for religious reasons. Not everyone teaches their children that 1 + 1=2 and then gives them the Bible verse to back it up.

But here's my question, and it is all based on my personal experience, I am not in any way implying that all Christians are in these camps.....(had to clarify so I don't get a bunch of "Well I'm Christian and don't do that"s...)

I've met just as many Christians who think sending children into public school is a sin as Christians who think NOT sending children into public schools is a sin. Either it's a sin to subject them to the public school mentality or it's a sin to deny them the ability to go out and "witness" to the heathens sitting in the desk next to them.

Which is it, folks? And while you're figuring it out, can you politely allow my to homeschool MY children in the way I see fit and appropriate, and for the reasons MY family thinks are important?


----------



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

I like your last two questions !!

The first i can't answer and the second for myself I would say yes despite others disagreeing

another thing that bothered me about this is that it doesn't talk about TRUE benefits for the kids ...

I wish there were more DebraBakers around to counteract these people
of whom I had my own dealings with and can say NEVER EVER again


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Quote:

Which is it, folks? And while you're figuring it out, can you politely allow my to homeschool MY children in the way I see fit and appropriate, and for the reasons MY family thinks are important?
I don't think it is a "sin" to send your child to public school. I think the best enviroment educationally, spiritually, and emotionally is the family setting. As a christian, I don't want my dc to be indoctrinated with the worldview that government schools provide. THat said grnbn , I stand behind you 100% to homeschool your child if that is what you want for dc. I believe we should always protect the parents right to decide what is best for their child whether it concerns their health, education, or anything else.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

Personally I think it should be up to individual families.

I homeschooled my children for ten years. I support homeschoolers.

To be honest I see strengths and weaknesses in either of the three choices (homeschool, private school, and public school) I will share my concerns about homeschooling if you wish but I don't really think it's relevant to the discussion.

I have my children in public school (actually one is technically in a private school) because I don't currently have a vision to homeschool my children. Our public schools are wonderful and my children have received a better education than I could provide at home.

My personal red flags go up when I read about people who think *all* parents *should* homeschool and sending a child into public school is "sin".

A long time ago in a galaxy far far away I went to a church like that and all the people followed the pastors' teaching like a bunch of lemmings (whether they had a vision to homeschool.) Oh, the guilt, the shame!!! Let me tell you, you need a clear vision to do a good job homeschooling and I take issue with some man telling me if I don't homeschool I'm in sin (and note it's men telling *women* they're sinning if they don't and it's almost always the women who do the day in and day out of homeschooling)

Debra Baker


----------



## PurpleBasil (Jan 28, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TiredX2*
Debra---

I think that SQ is pro-corporal punishment. ?

SQ, this isn't true, is it? I remember you are pro IVF, maybe that's what's being confused here?

If one is pro physical punishment then the HSLDA is a perfect fit, imo.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

sadly there is no confusion going on with this.


----------



## isleta (Nov 25, 2002)

ITA Arduianna.

Also, I would like to HS but as a single mama it's not reality. I would love for him to go to a free school-none in my area









If my son does go to a public school I, as his mama will supplement his education at home and not blame the schools for lack of education. I feel there has to be a partnership for a child to have a positive and fullfilling education.


----------



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

tried FYT? I know there are some single mamas here that homeschool and know a few in my hs group ...
I understand when it isn't an option though

Unfortunately after 10 years of dealing with this district I can say the schools fail to educate ( see our story on the hs board) and they do NOT want the parents involved except as stepford parents
Their Partners In Education means SILENT PARTNER -ok sorry for OT

but this still scares me and it doesn't fairly represent all Christians as well as homeschoolers so I see it having negative impact two different -maybe even more ways


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

[


----------



## 3 little birds (Nov 19, 2001)

Wow, thanks for posting this, I had no idea hslda was a "Christian" organization. I went to the website and couldn't help but notice their fight against same-sex marriage. What in the world does that have to do with homeschooling?

I am so confused.


----------



## Jonas (May 25, 2004)

Sigh.







Sometimes it sucks to be liberal _and_ a homeschooler. HSLDA is the only organization attempting to comprehensively monitor HS legislation, yet they're also run by highly conservative







s. So even though we've benefited from them we've decided not to join/send them any money.

As for the association between homeschooling and Christianity, that comes from two sources. The first is historical: homeschoolers were the earliest proponents of ensuring the legality of homeschooling, particularly when many small religious schools lost their not-for-profit status in the 70's. The second is the news: every time you her one of those isolated cases of homeschoolers doing something abusive, they turn out to be nutty conservative "Christians". The evening news loves that kind of stuff ("if it bleeds, it leads!").


----------



## lovemybaby (Jun 29, 2003)

There are some hs organizations that are secular, such as AHEM in Massachusetts. They keep up with legislation etc. and were formed in part because of problems with HSLDA.

I would never join HSLDA because of their pro-corporal punishment stance. They have fought and continue to fight ratification of the UN Rights for the Child; all 191 nations in the UN have ratified this treaty except the US and Somalia (!). They don't want children to have rights, and they don't want parents' "rights" to hit children taken away. HSLDA also promotes Home School Digest which was discussed at length in the "Whipping Babies" thread; HSD is, in short, an extreme fundamentalist baby-whipping mag, and HSLDA is offering a 44% discount on it! HSLDA lawyers sometimes represent parents in court who are being accused of neglect and physical abuse of their children. And HSLDA fought hard against the repeal of Section 43 in Canada (43 allows hitting by parents and educators - it was partially repealed recently). HSLDA is definitely into promoting an extreme fundamentalist view, not only on homeschoolers but on all of society. Check out their Patrick Henry College uke uke

It seems homeschoolers are split into 2 camps, those who homeschool because of the parents' religious ideas, and those who homeschool because the parents want their children to be happy and to study what they want, free of bullying and the pressure of grades etc. I'm in the second category, though I'm also a Christian.

Anyway, I don't think sending children to public school is a sin! But with homeschooling I think what matters most is the parents' motivations. Parents shouldn't do whatever they feel like with their children, or whatever HSLDA or their church leaders say; they should do what is genuinely best for them.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

I have homeschooled and I am Jewish.

There are Jewish homeschooling groups out there.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

I hope our country never ever ratifies the un treaty on childs rights









Quote:

Few Americans are aware that agencies within the United Nations system are involved in a campaign to undermine the foundations of society--the two-parent married family, religions that espouse the primary importance of marriage and traditional sexual morality, and the legal and social structures that protect these institutions. 1 Using the political cover of international treaties that promote women's and children's rights, the social policy sector of the United Nations--specifically, committees that oversee implementation of U.N. treaties in social policy areas and the special-interest groups assisting them--is urging countries to change their domestic laws and national constitutions to adopt policies that ultimately will affect women and children adversely. 2
UN

Quote:

Make it clear that professional women working outside the home have a higher social status than those who stay at home.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

FYI, that quote that SQ just post is NOT from the UN (although she makes it look that way). It is from the Heritage Foundation. It is their interpretation of what the UN says.

I personally am glad that so many wacky Christains choose to homeschool. I have made the decision to send my child to public school. The less people there trying to shove religion down her throat the better. I do however feel bad for the non-wacky Christians that get labelled as such for homeschooling.

Victorian

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*
I hope our country never ever ratifies the un treaty on childs rights









UN


----------



## lovemybaby (Jun 29, 2003)

That quote from the Heritage Foundation sounds like the ultimate in paranoia! Like the UN is plotting to undermine family life by urging member nations to protect children in basic ways, like making sure they're not sold into slavery! I wonder if SQ has read the UN Rights For The Child, and if so, what aspect of the actual treaty she objects to?

Here's the treaty: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm

The last time I checked, none of the nations that have signed have destroyed family life :LOL


----------



## Els' 3 Ones (Nov 19, 2001)

We haven't signed bcuz the powers that be don't give a rip about human rights........................or children.

Witness -

Abu Ghraib

10yrs of sanctions - which killed one half *million* Iraqi children under the age of 5

The endless support thru the years for dictators around the globe who, with our knowledge, murdered and *tortured* 100's of thousands of women and children.

In my own state, a woman lost custody of her child (single mom) for bf past a certain age. Women are losing custody right and left to x-husbands due to bf, or co-sleeping, or non-vaxing. What rights DO we have with regard to our children?

This would not only protect our children and ourselves...............it would protect us from our rouge government.


----------



## sohj (Jan 14, 2003)

T

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*
I hope our country never ever ratifies the un treaty on childs rights









sleeping queen, you really have to spend some time travelling in the rest of the world and see what some of the treaties of the UN arise from as well as how they play out. However, I _am_ glad to see that you've been looking at the Heritage Foundation's website. It is far more rigorous intellectually than Fox News.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

SOHJ,

While I tend to agree with your position I think your comments to SQ were a bit snotty.

DB


----------



## sohj (Jan 14, 2003)

No, a little tired of the subject, but not snotty. It is just a bald statement. Debra, this topic has come up before and the links provided by SQ were ones that, I am sure, if she had more time to examine them, she wouldn't have bothered adding to her post. They were from a scaremongering site with absolutely no sourcing. (And Fox News is astoundingly frequently guilty of the same thing.) The Heritage Foundation, on the other hand, although I generally do not agree with their positions, is, indeed, more on the rigorous end of the spectrum.

(Just for balance, I get really, really annoyed with websites/magazines/writers with whom I agree on the surface but who _also_ refuse to source and footnote and who prey on fear by scaremongering. I actually get far _more_ annoyed by them because I think the position could have been defended far better.)


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

AS I noted above I agree with your (Sohj's) position but I also understand that SQ's views are a minority around here.

I think it's good to hear dissenting opinions (even though some of SQ's drive me crazy) and I know it's intimidating to post when so many people are of the other persuasion.

I just want SQ to be able to feel comfortible posting.

The snide comments about the intellectual shallowness of Fox and, implied, the almost as shallow and intellectually thin literature found on the Heratige Foundation webpages isn't needed.

Let people read and judge for themselves.

I agree with you, trust me I do (oh, heck read my posts about these subjects) but I think we need to be civil to those with whom we disagree.

Debra Baker (forgive my typos I don't have time to correct them) Edited to say I'm sorry about the Hertage Foundation comment)


----------

