Packrat.
I agree with Leopard. That is thouroughly immoral. It has to be a state requirement. Nothing so drastic is put on home-schoolers here. I also strongly oppose such strong-arm tactics to make you jump through those hoops. You have my support and sympathy.
Oh man it is time for me to get off this site. I am actually responding to LB again but I just could not let this go.
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by Quote: mine:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by
But no I do NOT think compulsary school should be enforced on those families. I would settle for a periodic check whether governmental or private. Whether federal or community based.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LBs:
And here again we hit another crucial point in the discussion. Others are suggesting alternatives, but here you clearly state that some specific top down system must be in place, otherwise NO CHECKS would be possible. Rather than allowing individuals to choose what is important to their own children's education, you are suggesting that some mysterious others, who are presumably omniscient and know what one curriculum serves all children, have the authority to rule over these parents who certainly have the strongest connection to those children. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
Read the quote. I am not insisting on anything. I am stating an opinion. I am stating what I believe. Here is another of those ad hominems you get your bowels in an uproar over:
Remeber opinions? They are those things people are alowed to state in free societies. And yes I do recognize your right to beat them down for it if they do not fit your view. You, in fact, seem to make a hobby of it.
Anniee, to whom I still had some hope of sharing ideas,
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by as I'm concerned you've shown yourself either impaired, willfully ignorant, or devious, and whichever it is I have no desire to continue to engage it. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
I re-read my post to you. I made pretty sure I was not refuting you in any way but telling you what I believed and why I believed it. If that qulaifies me as
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by impaired, willfully ignorant, or devious<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
I sure don't know why.
I wonder if LB would consider that qoute an "ad hominim" or if you get a pass because you agree with him?
I was really trying to find a common ground. I sure am glad you assured me I did not make you angry though.
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by By the way, I DO love this topic, and if anyone wishes to engage in it honestly and intelligently, I am still interested in doing so. Just for the record, I'm still very much into it. Thanks. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
Who are you kidding? Without me being the Devil's advocate to this group you would just be posting nods and winks to each other about how enlightend you are and how you could take this country to "Nearly 100% lieteracy" if only the ignoran sheep of this county would hear you.
Think you might lose interest without an adversary or would you enjoy a 'lets all agree with me' fest?
Let us see....
Bye