Category Archives: Worldview

“If you feel incapable of teaching your own children it’s because you were taught that you were not capable”

Great video:

More quotes:

  • Homeschooling seems like a radical idea. Why? Because we are [indoctrinated]  (my word, not hers, but still the same thing)   to think that way.
  • But instead [of being self-learners] public schools teach children that they must be
  • in a classroom with an instructor to learn.  (Why? Because the institution is first and foremost about power and union jobs, not teaching your children.)
  • [Public school children] only know what they’ve been taught, and can not think for themselves, so anything that challenges their worldview is perceived as hostile… (ever wonder why disagreement has become synonymous with hate?)
  • Public school forms a wedge between the child and the parent.
  • The school challenges the parent’s authority from day one. (And parents help. By sending their child to the government indoctrinators, the child can only see that as their endorsement of the indoctrinators)
  • Parents surrender their children to literal strangers. (There was a time when this was not necessarily true. A parent could at least have a little confidence that the worldview of the “strangers” would be somewhat in step with their own. Nothing could be further from the truth in this age. Not only is the parent handing their children to strangers, he is also handing his children off to people who are strange.)
  • Instead of utterly enervating, homeschooling is empowering. (The institution goes on about  “empowerment”. But it is beholden to Marxist empowerment which only prepares them for slavery and submission to the state while promising a Utopian paradise of equality.  If you want to truly empower your children, keep them far away from the institution.)
  • Have you ever done homework with your child? Then you’ve homeschooled. (The great thing is, however, that since the institution is so inefficient and distracted, and has higher priorities to indoctrinate your child into Marxism, sodomy, radical feminism, perversions, and America-hatred, that they’re already being homeschooled by you in the evenings, it’s just called homework. Why not remove the garbage from your child’s education? Remove the institution.) 

Continue reading


Filed under Diversity?, Education, Unions, Worldview

Reason 362: Because Your Home Is The Dream School

I watched this video by Prager Univeristy, and I couldn’t help but to realize that he was doing a pretty good job of describing the Wright Family Acadamy:

I love Dennis Prager, and I think his Prager Univeristy videos are excellent, and that they’re making a little bit of a difference. But, there’s a “but”, when it comes to the topic of education. So I’m going to pick this apart just a bit, but please don’t let that be an insinuation that I don’t like the video or Prager Univeristy.

He starts out by saying this:

If every high school principal gave the following speech, America would be a much better place.

I disagree strongly with this statement because I think it’s false. America wouldn’t be a much better place. It’d be the same place, and here’s why.   I’ll call it the “make bad and fix” solution rather than the “make good” solution. This statement ignores and underestimates 8 years of education that took place with formative children. You can try to teach high schoolers new things, but they rightly have minds of their owns. They can and will balk at your “fix”, because they are not children. They are adults. And to call 14-year-olds children may seem like an innocuous “problem”, but it’s not. In reality, it’s a major problem, and Prager highlights why in this first statement. He’s using a “make bad and fix” approach assuming that the bad is still fixable. But these young adults are well on their way to being what they’re going to be. There is a proverb in Prager’s Bible that explains this. It says, “teach a CHILD in the way he should go, and he will not depart from it”. In other words, don’t make bad and fix, but rather, make good.

I do have to appreciate one thing in this statement, however. He is at least backing out of college and looking at high school. Most conservative pundits look only at college as if the first 8 years of making bad never happened.  He needs to back up another 8 or so years.

The second problem I’ll talk about is the top-down, external-in approach. The homeschooling model is a bottom-up, internal-out approach. It doesn’t try to fix our social problems by the “top” making better laws for people to break, or forcing externals. As the old saying goes, “those who are forced against their will are of the same opinion still”.  No, for one, making America a better place is not my motivation for homeschooling, although I realize that home education will do just that. But it’s a byproduct of my efforts, not the reason for them. I do it because I love my children and I want their beliefs to be consistent with reality. But I also want my children’s hearts to be right. And if I can, by God’s grace, do that, then external forces won’t be required.  And these heart changes, for the most part, happen early in life, long before the children get to high school.

So, dear parent, this is so very important. Keep your children at home, and teach them when they are open to your teaching. Teach them in the way they should go early. Make them good. Don’t let the institution make them bad and then try to fix it. It is difficult at best to do that, and more likely to be impossible.

Leave a comment

Filed under Discipline, Indoctrination, Worldview

Reason 357: Because You Don’t Want The Institution Defining Success

So many times we loose site of “The Bottom Line“.  We get into a rat race with the world and we want our children to win. We want them to be the best, and to leave all our neighbor’s children in the dust. We want to be proud.

But I happen to think that there’s much more to life than a big house on the hill that our neighbors look up at and sigh with envy. I’ve personally met too many people who knew how to makes lots of bucks, but could not hold a family together if their lives depended on it. From one marriage to another they went, always looking for something promised, but which was not there. And worst of all, this rat race is easy to slide into for all of us.

I think therefore that it’s a good idea to write down what we want for our children, and to perhaps even define success for ourselves so that we can keep our eye on the prize. And with that in mind, I wrote this post some time back on my other blog:

If My Children Get A Good Education, Get A Good Job, Get And Stay Married, I Will Consider Myself A Failure As A Father

Here is the post in its entirety:

If we are to aim at success in raising our children, then we ought to at least be willing to define what that success would be.  As a father who desires to see all of life from a biblical perspective, that success is going to look different from the world’s ideas of success.  It would seem wise to me, therefore, to start by seeing all of life as a short prelude to an eternal destiny of torturous damnation or heavenly bliss.

But I know that our world lies to us.  It seeks to comfort us with promises of gray.  We are incessantly warned against the folly of seeing things as either black or white.  Gray is a safe refuge, or so we are told.  But not for me!  Gray is ignorance.  It is an unsafe place; a place of shortsightedness.  Standing at a fork in the road does not afford us such a gray existence.  We must proceed in but one direction.  And so it will be at our last breath.  Our past will determine our eternal future.  And this life will be but a speck in light of what lies beyond it, and it is in that speck that the choice must be made to either clothe ourselves in Christ, so that the real us can be hidden from our Father in heaven, or to dare approach Jehovah’s throne of judgment naked.

Yet it is our sinful nature to fix our eyes on the speck that is the present.  But in doing so we can’t but define success according to its standards.  We find ourselves hoping above all that our children are spared material want first, and  spiritual want second.  But this is a short-sighted perspective. To fix our eyes on Jesus is to fix our eyes on eternity and not this race!  It is in eternity that His throne, at the right hand of the Father, is situated.  The great cloud of witnesses do not cheer when we graduate from a secular humanist college, or get that high paying job.  We are deceived if we do not grasp that good character will give our children joy.  A starved spirit with well-fed flesh is success, at best, for only a moment within this speck of time.  The “present” intends to divert our fleshy eyes from our ultimate destiny by selling us sheetrock, cars, and toys.  But it will leave all who dare try it wanting.

Away with such folly!  It is better, if I truly take Jesus’ words to heart, to define success for my children by their love for Him, and their desire to follow his commandments.  It is my daily prayer.  It is my life.  May my children be complete failures in the eyes of this world and yet receive great applause from the great cloud of witnesses who have gone before them.  That is how I define success.

Leave a comment

Filed under Family, Worldview

Reason 355: Because The Pseudo-Science That Your Child Will Be Taught Is Not Science At All, It’s A Lie

The idea of “settled science” when it comes to liberal schemes is a tactic. Its purpose is to shut down conversation and squash dissent.  You’re just supposed to believe whatever harebrained scheme someone’s dreamed up and accept it without question; because after all you’re an idiot and your elitist masters are not.

Here are a few of the schemes right off the top of my head, all of which have been promoted and propagated for years in the public schoolhouse through indoctrination. All of these are supposed to be “settled science”.

  • evolution
  • so-called “climate change”
  • gender confusion
  • the personhood of the unborn child
  • the social implication of the destruction of the family

But there is a better answer to the questions we don’t have scientific answers for. “I don’t know” is a good answer, especially when you don’t know. To claim to know something when you don’t, for whatever motivation that pushes you toward that answer, and then hiding your ignorance under the banner of science, is to destroy real science. There’s no shame in not knowing something. We only know, after all, a tiny smidgen of what there is to be known; a mere fraction of a fraction.  But to admit ignorance requires humility, and when you are all about inserting yourself into the vacuum you’ve created by destroying the concept of God in the minds of men,  humility doesn’t work all that well.

But in the meantime, when masses of people have been convinced that things are known that are not known, ignorance has become a deadly and caustic business, especially when desired truth and suspicions are taught as confirmed science in what is thought of as the one stop shop for “knowledge”, the institutions of education. But you can know this. Much of what your children will learn in the institution is deception and lies, maybe even most of what they will learn there. But keep in mind, we learn much more, in whatever venue we learn in, than grammar, real science and math. We also learn things that will become or inform our worldview, and it is precisely there that the lies are poured on thickist.

Today I have a video to share that looks at just one of the popular lies being pushed as of late. Here it is:

The bottom line is truth matters, and it matters a lot. Lies are bad. So to keep your children from  “learning” through lie upon lie, keep them home where you can teach them precept upon precept.

Leave a comment

Filed under Evolution, Homosexual agenda, Transgender, Worldview

Reason 352: Because The Only Agenda That Should Matter Is Yours

It would seem, given the numbers in our article today, that homeschooling is catching on, and that is a promising thing for our future. And it would seem that the moral decadence pushed by the institution has played no small part in the increase we’re all watching. Since  the time that the courts have begun to decree what the people have voted down, there really is no alternative for parents who don’t want their children being a rat in the social laboratory that is the institution.

Here is an article that discusses this:

Pressed By Common Core And LGBT Agenda, More Families Homeschool

a bit from the article:

In addition, LGBTQ activists have successfullyinundated schools with their approved ideology inside sex education that starts now as early as kindergarten. With these problems in public schools and many families unwilling or unable to afford the cost of private schooling, more and more families are choosing homeschooling as an alternative. This ensures they can avoid educational indolence and moral apathy while picking and choosing what learning method, curriculum, and schedule works best for their family.

Please don’t think your school is different. It isn’t. If you want your child’s education to be different, then you’ll have to take them away from Ceasor, and educate them at home.


Leave a comment

Filed under Common Core, Homosexual agenda, Moral Relativism, Sex, Transgender, Worldview

Reason 338: You Don’t Train Soldiers During Combat.

But you do train them for combat. This is an article written from the perspective of training your child while at the same time sending her to the schoolhouse:

   Key Things Skeptics Will Say to Shame Your Kids for Being Christians

Did you ever stop to think about how arbitrary some things are? Like, when does a boy become a man? The answer? Why 18, of course. Why 18? Because the government says so. Why does the government say so? Who knows? It’s an arbitrary number pulled out of a magical hat somewhere. The reality is a little different however. Adulthood comes much earlier than 18 for the human being. Exactly when varies, but one thing we can know for sure, a five-year-old is not an adult. But that’s about the time most parents, after giving that five-year-old approximately zero training in fighting the good fight, throws her into combat. And then they are surprised when that child grows up and proves, after it’s too late, that she’s already gone.

This article looks at three key accusations your child will face starting very early in her education, and in ways that are cleverly disguised. And even though I disagree with some of the underlying philosophy, I think this article is worth reading. The three accusations are:

  • You’ve been indoctrinated
  • If you allow yourself to think critically, you’ll see there’s no reason to believe in God.
  • Christians are less intelligent than atheists. Studies show it.

In the first one the author and I part ways. It’s my position that all human beings are indoctrinated. I certainly have a doctrine, and I teach my children in the ways of that doctrine. Secular Humanism is a doctrine also. And the schoolhouse will teach your children that doctrine. But either way, your child will be indoctrinated. The only question is, by whom?

Since human beings have a way of seeing themselves individually as the reference point from all things in this world are measured, then they see themselves as neutral. So then, if anyone has a different doctrine on life than their own, then that person is seen as different. Throw in the fact that the schoolhouse indoctrinates into group-think, then the individual’s worldview, which is almost exactly the worldview of every peer, is affirmed by the culture. The young person, therefore, immersed in Secular Humanism and the campus culture only thinks he is thinking critically. If he truly was thinking critically he would see that his thinking is based just as much on faith as the person he sees as an uncritical thinker. He is simply holding as “known” that which is not known, but is only believed.

The last one begs for a defining of terms, like, what is meant by intelligence? It would seem to follow that those who have been exposed to the schoolhouse the most would be the most indoctrinated into the religion of Secular Humanism. So it would only follow that the measure of a person’s “intelligence” is a standard set by Secular Humanism. But think about it. A person is born with a certain level of intelligence. A few have a high level of intelligence, most find themselves in the bell curve, and then some poor souls are simply not very smart at all. So what is the young Christian child to do? Will she be judged as intelligent if she rejects her parent’s relligion, because, you know, that would be the smart thing to do?  Well of course not. That would be silly.

The bottom line is this. When you send your young children into the schoolhouse, you are sending them into a combative situation that no child is equipped to handle, and that no child should be forced to handle. The stakes are incredibly high. It’s not as if the worse thing that can happen to a person is to get a substandard education in this short life. No, the worst thing that can happen will happen in the life that is to come. And the saddest thing of all is, the schoolhouse is going to give your child a substandard education anyway.


Leave a comment

Filed under Evangilism, Peer Pressure, Worldview

Reason 334: Because There’s No Morality In The Moral Relativism The Institution Teaches

There was a man who had earlier seen no reason for his legs and so had them amputated.  At a later point, the man began to lament that he was extremely limited in his mobility and he just couldn’t figure out exactly why. That’s kind of how this article reads:

Students’ Broken Moral Compasses

What this writer can’t seem to figure out is that it’s not the compass that is broken, but rather it’s true north that’s broken. In a world in which one day north is one direction and the next it’s  some other direction, a compass is of no use. The author assumes that the god/state is sufficient for determining true north. He can’t see that what the state once outlawed, it now encourages.  That’s because the absolute north required for a reliable moral compass was amputated years ago with the help of the very institution in which  he laments that it’s now found to be absent.

The established religion of Secular Humanism in the state school is simply unable to teach absolutes. While the state has no problem teaching self-contradicting ethics, it will never contradict it’s own ethic that there are no absolute ethics. It follows then that ethics is thrown into the same box as other impossible-to-define, “ethical” causes, such as equality, or social justice and so on. In this environment ethics just winds up being the square peg of feelings being hammered into the round hole of absolutes.

An example from the article:

As my students seemed to crave more meaningful discussions and instruction relating to character, morality, and ethics, it struck me how invisible these issues have become in many schools. By omission, are U.S. schools teaching their students that character, morality, and ethics aren’t important in becoming productive, successful citizens?

The first word written in neon is “meaningful”. Meaningful you say? How can that be? The institution teaches that each person is the product of chance, that they are only arranged molecules in a chemical sack that will one day cease to be, and in between the survival of the womb and the grave the accumulation of material wealth is the means of measuring justice.  Because make no mistake, when the institution teaches justice, it’s teaching material redistribution.

It is quite amazing that someone can come so close to the problem and not see the real problem. He correctly laments Common Core. He understands that there is a problem with ethics. But he can’t quite walk across the room to see the answer because his moral legs were amputated years ago.

But it doesn’t have to be this way for your child. Meaning is important, and there is meaning in life beyond life itself. And in the same well from which we draw up meaning, we also draw up morals, which, as it turns out, are absolute after all.


1 Comment

Filed under Moral Relativism, Worldview

Reason 260: Because You Want To Train The Heart According To Reality

There are two different philosophies when it comes to education. One is to enforce your will on the outside and hope the inside will come along behind. The other is to just change the inside, that is to say, to change the heart. We think the latter way is not only the right way but the only way to educate.

In this age, there seems to be a preoccupation with what a person does and not so much with what he thinks. We are told to, for example, refer to some men as a she even though we know he’s a he. We’re told to deny reality and create an alternate reality. We are to pretend that what is not, is.  With this philosophy, Law and coercion are king because it’s the externals that matter.

But we believe that it is the heart that must be trained. Sure, I don’t want my daughter to dress like a prostitute, but more than that I want my daughter to not want to dress like a prostitute. One requires law and external coercion. The other requires heart training. Keeping this in mind lets look at an article I found:

School District Ignites Controversy With Proposed Restrictions on ‘Leggings,’ ‘Skinny Jeans’ and ‘Other Excessively Tight-Fitting Pants’

It seems the schoolhouse is upset about what those poor souls placed in their charge are wearing. But It’s not because their attire makes them look like prostitutes and hoodlums. The way those in the schoolhouse see it, their choice of clothes is causing bullying. Who’d of thought?

But I found this comment by a parent most interesting:

“If bullying is the impetus, do a better job of teaching the kids to be nice. Don’t tell them how to dress.”

Here’s a parent who gets it… well kind of. He understands at least that it is the heart that needs to be trained. But he’s totally confused about who’s job that is, or to what higher order one should appeal in order to discover what “niceness” is. Apparently he’s fine with an institution that invites human butchers, God haters and the depraved in to help train his children, but he still wants them to train his children to be nice. Unfortunately, that’s what the institution actually has plans to do, but he might be surprised one day to discover that his definition of “nice” is different than the institution’s definition.

But that’s just it. Goodness and niceness are words that appeal to an order that supersedes our own wills and desires. It is not nice or good to lie. I think we all get that. But it’s also not nice to lie to someone with psychological problems by telling him that he doesn’t’ have a problem.  And it’s not nice to lie to those who know he has a problem by telling them that they’re the ones who have the real problem, then teach ohters to start calling those who now have the new problem not-so-nice names like ______phopes.  It’s not nice to teach generation after generation that they don’t have to think critically, that all they have to do is to call people names, and label them evil when those people have ideas that are different. In short, it’s not nice for a small group of people to turn the masses into slaves, which is exactly what all of this kind fo teaching prepares them to be. For the slave, the institution IS the higher order.

But the higher order supersedes the institution. And unfortunately for the institution, the higher order has always been, and it will always be. It is the reality. As for me, I’m teaching my children that they don’t get to decide right and wrong. They can only abide by it, or rebel against it. But I also do my best to train them to desire to abide by it. And dear friends, no institution can or will do that for you, nor were they ever meant to according to the higher order. This is one job, if you want it done right, you’ll want to do it yourself.



Leave a comment

Filed under Lawlessness, Religion, Worldview

Reason 248: Because Evil Is Bad In A Good Sort Of Way

On a superficial level, I can see how someone could think that ridding culture of the silly notion of God would be a good thing; kind of like a world imagined in John Lennon’s song: “Imagine”. He asked us all to imagine that there’s no god or religion, that above us was only molecules… just like below us… and in us… just molecules. But don’t think about it any further than that if you want to have any relationship whatsoever with logic.

But that’s just what the state is up to. But it has a monumental problem in attempting two tasks at the same time, both of which are pulling in opposite directions. First, it teaches in its schoolhouse that we are nothing more than sacks of molecules arranged by chance over time in an environment that came about the same way. The best they can come up with is “survival of the fittest”. So naturally it teaches that there is no such thing as ultimate good and evil and that such notions are nothing more than electrical impulses this way and that, all set in motion from billions of years of chance arrangement that all started from nothing. That’s one task.

At the same time the state is tasked to teach that there is ultimate right and wrong; that you can’t pollute the environment, or say anything at all derogatory about certain depraved inclinations, or question the state about anything at all.  So in short it’s easy to see that the state’s real task is simply to usurp God. It must at the same time say there is no god and then put itself up as a god. It rejects all ideas of evil, then makes laws, as if evil exists. Of course, it has no basis for defining evil beyond itself. And that’s why I refer to it so often in these writings as the god/state which must reject evil while teaching against evil. Yes, confusing, I know. But there’s nothing new here really. Man by his nature has always been in rebellion against God so it should be no surprise to us when the worship of man in Secular Humanism becomes the established religion.

That’s why the average graduate from the state school, will, on the one hand, say that no one should judge and on the other judge harshly those who don’t agree with them on social issues. They will preach endlessly about environmentalism, then drive their air-polluting cars home to their large air-conditioned houses and not think a thing about it. They will constantly cry for more of a thing so indefinable as “social justice”, and then go to a rally and decry that someone out there thinks that it’s wrong to suggest that crushing and dismembering babies is evil. But as I said, this is not new. Let’s look back a hundred years to C. K. Chesterton. He had this to say in his book “Orthodoxy”:

For all denunciation implies a moral doctrine of some kind; and the modern revolutionist doubts not only the institution he denounces, but the doctrine by which he denounces it. Thus he writes one book complaining that imperial oppression insults the purity of women , and then he writes another book (about the sex problem) in which he insults it himself. He curses the Sultan because Christian girls lose their virginity, and then curses Mrs. Grundy because they keep it. As a politician, he will cry out that war is a waste of life, and then, as a philosopher, that all life is waste of time. A Russian pessimist will denounce a policeman for killing a peasant, and then prove by the highest philosophical principles that the peasant ought to have killed himself. A man denounces marriage as a lie, and then denounces aristocratic profligates for treating it as a lie. He calls a flag a bauble, and then blames the oppressors of Poland or Ireland because they take away that bauble. The man of this school goes first to a political meeting, where he complains that savages are treated as if they were beasts; then he takes his hat and umbrella and goes on to a scientific meeting , where he proves that they practically are beasts. In short, the modern revolutionist, being an infinite sceptic, is always engaged in undermining his own mines . In his book on politics he attacks men for trampling on morality; in his book on ethics he attacks morality for trampling on men. Therefore the modern man in revolt has become practically useless for all purposes of revolt. By rebelling against everything he has lost his right to rebel against anything.

…and I recently saw this by a more recent thinker:

Screenshot (233)

This is Ravi Zacharias. He has moral clarity. The one asking the question is a student indoctrinated by the state. He is confused. He want’s to borrow God’s laws, then self-righteously judge everyone but himself, including God, using that standard.  But we should expect nothing different. He’s been indoctrinated to think the way he does. He couldn’t not think that way no more than an ice cream maker could pop popcorn. He’s  confident that he’s right. And he’s just as confident no one should be confident about anything.

It’s one thing to be confused. But to be confused in a confused society is something far worse. There’s no one to help you. You feed off of each other’s confusion. But even worse yet is to send your children to be trained in a confused institution put there by a confused culture. There is good… and there’s evil,. and to grasp that is a far better than living in the confusion of thinking that they both do and don’t exist at the same time.

The truth is that if good and evil are based on electrical impulses going on between our ears, then there’s no such thing as good and evil… and that’s exactly what your child will be taught at the schoolhouse. But there is good… and there is evil, and that is good. At least it’s good to have that much logic at your foundations. And it’s a far better thing to live knowing that there is evil in the world, and to be taught the same thing, than to live in the gray fog of confusion that is feeling that they both do and don’t exist at the same time.


Leave a comment

Filed under Moral Relativism, Worldview

Reason 232: Because You Have No Say In Government Education

In the 1920’s, in the very heart of “The Bible Belt, the ACLU orchestrated an attack on the teaching of creationism in Dayton Tennessee. It was a battle that they lost, but a war that they won. Parents would now have to send their children to school to be taught that their existence was nothing more than happenstance. These children grew up and filled the courts.

In the 1960’s, the courts found in the constitution that prayer in school was unconstitutional. It hadn’t been there before, but these now grown up children steeped in an evolutionary mindset suddenly discovered it. It was a de facto constitutional amendment. Parents would now have to send their children to school to be taught a more militant form of evolutionary fantasy with the expulsion of anything God.

In the 1970’s the courts found in the constitution that it was a human right for a mother to murder her unborn child. That right hadn’t been there before, but these now grown up children, steeped in Godlessness evolutionary thinking didn’t care. The butchers at Planned Parenthood were given the green light and would shortly have the red carpet laid out for them at the government schoolhouse. Parents? If you don’t like it, shut up.

Last year the courts found in the constitution that the word marriage, as it had always been defined, had been redefined. It had always throughout human history been defined and understood as what it is, but now the courts went against the will of the people and found in the constitution that it was illegal to define it that way anymore.

Soon the courts will redefine the words male and female. The schoolhouse has played its part in that too. Here is a story of just one of those battles.

Minnesota Parents Sue To Get Trans Classes In Kindergarten

The issue became public when the Edwards demanded the school present transgender materials and information to their child’s classmates. “Key components included a letter to be sent home to kindergarten families notifying them of the transition; use of the book ‘I Am Jazz‘ in each kindergarten classroom; and communications for any families who asked about opting out of the classroom education, to direct them to equivalent content and to outline behavior expectations,” the complaint states.

While the school was initially willing to implement such materials, even considering an additional book, “My Princess Boy,” school officials changed their minds after backlash from parents who didn’t want transgenderism taught at such a young age. Some parents believed an opt-out would not be sufficient because the information would inevitably be spread to the other students who did not receive the instruction directly. As a result, the school chose to enforce its anti-bulling policy and not conduct gender re-education.

None of us have escaped the indoctrination cycles. Those who hate their creator are committed to erasing Him, and will stop at nothing. To give an inch is to give a mile. These poor parents want to hold some semblance of normalcy without being painted as haters and bigots.  I’m sorry, but there’s no middle of the road on this one.

It doesn’t matter how this particular case turns out. Parents and their children will loose. They lost the day they sent their children to be indoctrinated by a God hating state because they are more worried about their material well-being than their spiritual well-being.

The schoolhouse is in free-fall with the rest of society. You, as a parent, will have no say in what goes on there. But you will have every say in what goes on in your house. Keep them home.

Leave a comment

Filed under Abortion, Evolution, Indoctrination, Planned Parenthood, Prayer, Religious Freedom, Transgender, Worldview