Need to know something

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is unfortunate that some parents home-school because they don't want their kids exposed to anything bad. However, my parents didn't shelter me, they just taught me right from wrong and let me decide for myself.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
In my area the "Academy" is 12,000 a year and Parochial schools are about 300 before high school and about 5000 in high school. About 20% non-catholic before high school and about 30% in high school. Yes, I am a non-Catholic Catholic school survivor.
 
As I said, for me private (parochial or otherwise Christian religious), but no more homeschool slackers, GP, you appear to be the rare exception in my experience.
Click to expand...

How large of a sample size are we talking about?
 
How large of a sample size are we talking about?
Click to expand...

An n of 3000 randomly selected to reflect the population. In addition, a control group of similar size and age were selected from non-homeschooled college students. Gender was similarly reflected is both groups so I felt there was no need to control for gender. My findings will be reported in a forthcoming peer-reviewed article in the American Journal of Sociology.
 
First of all I consider myself independant, non-affilated.

With that said some issues I am very liberal and others I am very conservitave. I'd just like to know why certian people think I should be one or the other. For example, If I take a very liberal view on the war on drugs, Why does that obligate me to take a liberal view on an unrelated issue. Abortion for example. Or to give another example If I take a conservative view on gun ownership why should I be required to take a conservative view on the 1st amendment?
Click to expand...

+1 million

They want you to either be a Fascist or a Socialist. I chose to be an American.

I know a woman who describes herself as a bleeding heart democrat but she is pro life, and was shunned by her liberal peers.

I agree with 90% of what the republican party stands for, but I'm not overly religious(even though I am christian), I don't want to see Christianity in public schools. I think we should be able to listen, or watch whatever we want as an adult, including Porn. If your gay, I don't see a problem with you having some sort of partnership, just don't make out in front of my kids. I think abortion is bad, if the child is "viable". It was the only smart thing Ron Paul stood for, its not about religion, its about the rights of the child. If I can go to jail for murder, because I kicked a pregnant woman in the stomach and killed her unborn child, then why is it legal for a woman to have an abortion. I see no problem with very early stage abortions (aka morning after pill), but if say infant can survive outside the womb with medical care at week X then abortions should be illegal beyond that point. Just remove the child, and stick it in an incubator, and let someone adopt it.

Look at McCain. He thinks for himself, and does not paint himself in a conservative or liberal corner. He is taking so much flak for it, but I kind of admire it. He is not going to follow what the talking heads are saying.

I fear ultra liberal and ultra conservative leaders as much as I fear radical muslim leaders.

I'm happy being in the middle.
 
First of all I consider myself independant, non-affilated.

With that said some issues I am very liberal and others I am very conservitave. I'd just like to know why certian people think I should be one or the other. For example, If I take a very liberal view on the war on drugs, Why does that obligate me to take a liberal view on an unrelated issue. Abortion for example. Or to give another example If I take a conservative view on gun ownership why should I be required to take a conservative view on the 1st amendment?
Click to expand...

As others have alluded to, it's a side effect of the two-party system. Come election day, there's a 99% chance that either the guy with the R or the D next to his name will win, and most people want their guy to win, so they try to convince you that you need to agree with their guy as much as possible. Hence, polarization.
 
HKuser- I would be interested to read that. Did your study compare home school to public and to private? It would be interested to see how public and private schools compared to each other, as well as to home school.
 
There are a few problems with a system of more than three parties.

1) Unless winner must have 50% +1, a president could be elected with fewer than half the votes, meaning less than half the voters chose him. (Bill Clinton was elected both times with less than 50% meaning 51% or more wanted somebody else.)

2) Even if a third party candidate wins the presidency, they still have to win the support of the Ds and Rs in the Senate and House.
 
There are a few problems with a system of more than three parties.

1) Unless winner must have 50% +1, a president could be elected with fewer than half the votes, meaning less than half the voters chose him. (Bill Clinton was elected both times with less than 50% meaning 51% or more wanted somebody else.)

2) Even if a third party candidate wins the presidency, they still have to win the support of the Ds and Rs in the Senate and House.
Click to expand...

With #2 the idea is to have a 3rd party in the house and senate also. We would see less gridlock since at times it would hard for one party to fully control the majority.

With #1 you could have playoffs like in sports. Open up voting to any and all parties say two weeks before the "superbowl" election of the top two candidates.
 
Northern Sod Breaker...

You're not alone, we are few but I'd dare say we are politically more aware than most people. For many the Constitution and Bill of Rights are taken for granted, they think they don't have to put any effort having those rights. What they fail to see as some of us who are aware, those rights are slowly being chopped up and thrown away by both Democrats AND Republicans. I've always argued, "Why should I give up some of my rights just to give other rights more recognition?" Example: I believe in personal freedoms, therefore socially I am liberal; if you do drugs and are a gay atheist I really don't give a crap as long as you don't harm me. People would think I'm a bleeding heart liberal in that sense. But at the same time I also believe in gun ownership because I want a national insurance policy that lets me have the option to fight for my freedom. I believe in small government, low taxes, and reducing excess spending. Therefore I am financially conservative. Whatever happened to the days of people minding their own business and not bother how others live their lives? Honestly, we have bigger problems to deal with than what Jim Bob next door is smoking, and who his boyfriend for the week is. Like where the hell is Social Security going to be when I retire, how will we deal with this deficit, and when can we expect public schools to stop making our kids dumb?


Epyon
 
+1 Epyon ... all most average people want is to be left alone, all most politicians want is to manage every area of your life. I consider myself a political conservative ... that means I believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, I don't care what you do as long as you don't hurt people doing it and I want to be left to do what I want, when I want, without extensive government intrusion ... The Nanny State and socialism are gradually taking over what was a wonderful place to live, in my opinion .. politicians buy you off with handouts and soon you think that welfare money is really yours and don't realize that it used to be mine ...

You should be a fly on the wall at my place. My wonderful wife thinks Hillary walks on water and doesn't understand that while Bush may be bad, Hillary or Obama will be sooo much worse... as somebody said, if you think health care costs a lot now, just wait 'til it's free ... nothing is free, everything costs, the less you give away, the less you have to take from those who earned it in the first place ...

I have to say I'm glad I don't have children; they will be growing up in a world we can't even imagine -- and it ain't gonna be good ...
 
GPossenti...

They'll only teach evolution (a theory), global warming, anti-American, trash that embraces secularism and condemns religion, teaches 5th graders how to use condoms, glorifies Islam despite the fact that millions of Muslims want us destroyed, and that we should give amnesty to illegals, even though many of the illegals are child predators, murderers, rapists, etc..
Click to expand...

Not to jab at you, but more as an observation, that sounds like the rants of a religious zealot. Also, secular government is what keeps equality in this nation. I wouldn't consider any nation that has favoritism toward religion truly free, whether it was Islam or Christianity. I would also have to counter that evolution taught in schools might not be agreed by everyone, but it's better than teaching creationism in a setting where children from ALL walks of life are there NOT just Christianity.


Epyon
 
Not to jab at you, but more as an observation, that sounds like the rants of a religious zealot. Also, secular government is what keeps equality in this nation. I wouldn't consider any nation that has favoritism toward religion truly free, whether it was Islam or Christianity. I would also have to counter that evolution taught in schools might not be agreed by everyone, but it's better than teaching creationism in a setting where children from ALL walks of life are there NOT just Christianity.
Click to expand...

With that said. It a well known fact that most churches are 501c3. There are a few out there who are quick to say the church should stay out of govt. yet they are the same ones who quick to turn a blind eye when the govt. gets involved with the church. The first amendment clearly says the govt. should establish one religion as "Official" it also says the govt. shall not restrict the free practise there of. It would also seem to me that this a a pedulum that swings from one extreme to the other. Anyone who thinks this nation has a secular govt,. should consider that mail is not delivered on Sunday and other things like that. And right or wrong doesn't change the facts.
 
Last edited:
The first amendment clearly says the govt. should establish one religion as "Official"
Click to expand...

I'm looking at the first amendment right now and see no such statement. I think you need to read it again.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
Click to expand...

The forefathers knew just how dangerous an offical religion could be, and thats why they distanced the goverment from it.
 
+1 RedneckFur...

This is VERY true, religious institutions might not be taxed in this country, but the problem that the religious right seem to fail to read in the First Amendment is that it's clearly stated that the government should play a NEUTRAL role as far as religion is concerned.


Epyon

EDIT: To bikerbill; A lot of people in this country are too accepting of giving up the Constitution long as they have a disgusting sense of "security" of some sort whether it's having a fatter welfare check because they're lazy, making gay marriage illegal because it somehow jeopardizes their already crappy straight marriage, or giving up their right to habeas corpus because brown people that own 7-11s and are also doctors and lawyers are secretly plotting to nuke America from coast to coast. The biggest danger though is ignorance. America is THE place for the unconventional. That's what I love about this country, it's an amalgam of diversity that gives us our strength. I can choose to NOT live like the mainstream crowd as long as I harm no one, and the great thing about it is no one can stop me.
 
Epyon, I am religious, but these aren't religious arguments, they are common sense arguments.

Public schools only teach evolution (a theory). Macro-evolution has no evidence, has never been proven. Micro-evolution exists. There are several schools of thought on the beginning of the universe, but the public schools only teach one. (not a religious argument)

Global warming isn't happening. It's been cooling for the last 10 years. Al "evidence" of global warming, causation by man, "greenhouse gas killing the planet" is based solely on computer models and has been disproved time after time. (Not a religious argument)

Anti-American: You don't have to be religious to be an American and to love our country and our history. There are many people who hate the U.S.A. for whatever reason. (Not a religious argument)

embraces secularism and condemns religion (a religious statement, but being a religious person, I don't want somebody indoctrinating my kids that religion is bad just because they don't happen to practice.)

Teaches 5th graders how to use condoms. Religious or not, it's about preserving innocence. I will teach my kids that sex is sacred and reserved for marriage, just as I was taught and just as I practiced. You don't have to be religious to believe that innocence and virginity isn't something to be thrown away like confetti. (Not a religious argument)

Glorifies Islam despite the fact that millions of Muslims want us destroyed. We were attacked long before 9/11. Islam has been converting by the sword since its inception, and will not stop until Judaism and Christianity are destroyed. They attacked us, and we are taking them out. (Not a religious argument)

That we should give amnesty to illegals. Illegal aliens are people who have pissed on our immigration laws and came to the country illegally. Some want jobs, other commit more serious crimes. Amnesty destroys respect for the rule of law, rewards criminals, and punishes those best and brightest who wait in line to enter the country through legal means. Supporting amnesty teaches children that they don't have to obey the rules because someone will always give them a pass....even though many of the illegals are child predators, murderers, rapists, etc. another reason why amnesty is bad. We'll be taking all of the bad along with the good. The 2006 amnesty bill would have given amnesty to GANG MEMBERS. This from the same people who want to take our guns away. (Not a religious argument)

In terms of the first amendment, the government is not allowed to abridge the practice of any religion and may not establish an official religion. This was written with England in mind how the head of the state (King or Queen) is also the head of the Church. It was not to say there could be absolutely no touching of government and religion. If you disagree, go read George Washington's Thanksgiving address and tell me he was in violation of the non-existent "separation of Church and State"
 
NSB,
You should know what this thread started out discussing and that it no longer bears any resemblance to it's original topic. After all, it's *your* thread. :)

So I won't play the "should be locked" card since I personally lost interest when the subject drifted to religion in the first place.... but I do think it should get back on topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top