Here It Comes? Obama SecEd “Concerned” About Homeschooling September 29, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
Oh, please do share your enlightened, benevolent, and always self-giving knowledge with the rest of us. Please do show us how you plan to frame “homeschooling” as a “crisis” or “problem” to be addressed by the federal government:
The opening shot in a widely anticipated establishment crackdown on educational freedom may have been fired last week. Speaking at a breakfast with reporters, Obama’s controversial Education Secretary, pro-Common Core activist John King (shown), said he was “concerned” that some home-educated children were not getting the “breadth of instructional experience” they would get at a traditional school. While the senior Obama bureaucrat acknowledged that many homeschool families are doing it well, he also repeated the debunked smear that homeschooled children lack opportunities for socialization. Experts and critics, though, promptly lambasted King for his naive or malicious comments, suggesting that, if anything, he ought to be far more concerned about children in public schools. Some experts even offered to help educate Obama’s education chief on the issue.
Secretary King’s controversial remarks about home education were made during an event hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. While the Monitor‘s website did not report about the home-education comments, several other outlets, including Politico, did so. According to Politico, King said he was “concerned” that homeschooled students are not “getting the range of options that are good for all kids.” [Like exposure to crime, early sexualization, having to around kids from bad homes, leftist indoctrination, and all that sweet, sweet government money that is dependent upon headcount!] He also claimed to worry that “students who are homeschooled are not getting kind of the rapid instructional experience they would get in school,” unless parents are “very intentional about it.” [Rapid instructional experience? What does that even mean?] He said the “school experience” includes building relationships with “peers, teachers and mentors,” something that he claimed was “difficult to achieve in homeschooling unless parents focus on it.”
Ah, the old, tired, socialization meme. I guess I’ll just retort, for about the 500th time, that my homeschooled kids interact with both peers, and especially adults, far, far better than most public school kids. They haven’t been traumatized by bullying, exposed to drugs or pornography, or taught to teach adults as a weird and alien phenomenon. They’ve been taught to respect adults and to treat other kids with Christian charity. I can’t say how many times adult strangers have marveled at the behavior of our kids, and they are nothing extraordinary by homeschool standards.
It seems our friends on the left can’t make up their minds. While decrying the absence of your kids and mine from their schools, some are advocating that the ideal way to deal with climate change is to more or less snuff ourselves out by refusing to reproduce. Ah, with environmentalists, it all comes back to Malthusian misanthropy. As Gordon Gekko said in Wall Street, WASPs love animals, but hate people:
Carbon dioxide doesn’t kill climates; people do. And the world would be better off with fewer of them.
………After years of policymakers’ yammering about carbon-light or carbon-free this-or-that, Rieder basically zeroes in on the fact nobody wants to acknowledge: The number of people in the world—particularly in affluent countries—is literally a part of the equation.
Think of Rieder’s as the argument waiting in the wings should the 195-nation Paris Agreement, which came within a shade of enactment this week, fail to address the problem. [And yet the world is not warming. All those “warmest year ever!!11!” claims are based on junk science from ground-based thermometers placed over an asphalt parking lot, or next to an air-conditioner condenser, or adjacent to a large roadway, etc. See Anthony Watt for verifiable proof of that – almost all the purported warming, which satellite data continues to refute – is due to bad placement of US-based thermometers. Did you know, for instance, that US-based thermometers make up over 60% of worldwide ground-based temperature sensors? That’s a severe bias right there]
……….Total emissions is per-capita emissions times population, minus technological advances. We’ve been trying to get you to give up your toys—to change per-capita emissions. So if you’re really going to continue to show reluctance, well, here’s the other option: We’ll start putting pressure on families. If that pressure’s really, really, really undesirable, then, well, maybe people decide to start doing the other thing. [He actually tries to attribute this to a tiny slice of the population – the very rich, with private jets and 10,000 square foot homes. But to drastically reduce carbon dioxide emissions – a substance we all exhale! – he knows, though he does not say, that average people like you and I would be the ones that would have to suffer an incredible decrease in our standard of living, to such a degree, I’m sure, that living in the Sun Belt would become untenable since not many folks could continue here in the 100 degree heat without AC. Of course the leftist elite, however, especially the academics, would continue in very comfortable sinecures, well-paid, well-fed, well-housed, and enjoying all the accouterments of 21st century living, the freaking hypocrite]
If we could fix everything through decarbonizing our economy, then it’s likely that the population variable wouldn’t be a real concern.
So here’s your choice: freeze to death in the dark, mostly starved, or don’t have any kids. He actually speaks of using very heavy moral and even physical/financial pressure to bar people from having “too many” children. Enjoy that total economic implosion about 30-40 years later.
This is a literally insane religious conviction with very little, and mostly very poor, scientific backing. This is the anti-fat craze, the anti-eggs/butter/use chemicals instead craze, this is the phrenology, the eugenics of the 21st century. It seems the Left always has to hang its hat on some unsupported/unsupportable claim from dubious or plainly false science. It’s their substitute religion for real religion, but with a seeming compulsion to latch onto the more authoritarian and frankly false aspects. Of course, the compulsion is a feature, not a bug, extremists like this guy cast about from one purported looming disaster to another, all with one goal in mind: power for them and/or bending society to their preferred vision. Personal liberty and individual choice are anathema to such types, unless it has to do with the groin.
Every single left-wing movement has resulted in a mass catastrophe for humanity, almost always with millions of people dead. Babies that fail to be born through chemical or surgical abortion/contraception are just as dead as the millions who perished in Stalin’s GULAG or Hitler’s death camps. There is something utterly diabolical and full of hate for mankind – people not like themselves, specifically – in these kinds of insane extremists.
Only a PhD “ethicist” totally detached from the Truth of Jesus Christ could arrive at so macabre a conclusion. Perhaps instead of killing children, we should look for another course, like doing away with “ethicists” twisted by ideology and possessed of a reprobate sense.
In reality, this man desperately needs prayers. A soul so lost is a massive tragedy, not only for his evil influence, but in and of itself.
h/t reader TT both links