Home Schooling vs. Compulsory Defenseless Zone Youth Indoctrination

Geeko Sportivo said:
Sir, CPU's only can see Binary states of on and off states!
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. In both cases, there are two choices from which you must choose the most preferable, and one of the choices has major advantages.

Where you going to answer the question ... or not?
 
IBDaMann said:
Good news. No answer is forced.

I see that your deaf-person studies has taught you that if you don't like a particular conclusion that you simply call it a fallacy. Does that work for you with other deaf people? I mean, it should, right?
Click to expand...

Yes the answer is forced. You presented us no choice but to answer B.

And there is no such thing as "deaf-person studies".
 
AProudLefty said:
Why ask a dumb question? The question answers itself. The only problem is that if the parents are allowed free rein on educating their kids, it opens to abuse and indoctrination. We have seen examples of that.
Click to expand...

If on the other hand, children can only attend a government run public school, they are open to abuse and indoctrination. But the worse part of that is it becomes universal rather than isolated cases.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It's the result of his stellar pubic school edumacayhun...
Click to expand...
How does he imagine that he somehow has a stellar education? I guess his problem is that he never learned to read for comprehension and has never had to read his own posts critically. It would appear that ignorance really is bliss.
 
IBDaMann said:
How does he imagine that he somehow has a stellar education? I guess his problem is that he never learned to read for comprehension and has never had to read his own posts critically. It would appear that ignorance really is bliss.
Click to expand...

He got a trophy and certificate saying so from the school, just like every other student did...
 
T. A. Gardner said:
If on the other hand, children can only attend a government run public school, they are open to abuse and indoctrination. But the worse part of that is it becomes universal rather than isolated cases.
Click to expand...

So the answer is balance. Problem solved. /Thread
 
AProudLefty said:
Yes the answer is forced.
Click to expand...
Nope. You only imagined the gun pointed at your head.

AProudLefty said:
You presented us no choice but to answer B.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. I definitely gave you Option A as well. Go back and re-read the main post; I'm pretty sure you'll see it. It is the option right before option B.

AProudLefty said:
And there is no such thing as "deaf-person studies".
Click to expand...
Didn't you learn sign language and other deaf-person things?
 
IBDaMann said:
Nope. You only imagined the gun pointed at your head.


Incorrect. I definitely gave you Option A as well. Go back and re-read the main post; I'm pretty sure you'll see it. It is the option right before option B.


Didn't you learn sign language and other deaf-person things?
Click to expand...

Yes. From home. Self taught along with my family.

Any more questions?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
He got a trophy and certificate saying so from the school, just like every other student did...
Click to expand...

You hit the nail on the head. Teachers can either teach the students and make them smart, which will make the parents proud (and happy) ... or the teachers can not teach the students, give all the students "A"s and tell the parents how wonderfully smart their children are, which makes the parents proud (and happy).

The teachers union frowns upon the former (risk of raising the bar for all teachers) and requires the latter (so no child's feewings are huuwt).
 
AProudLefty said:
Wrong. I've always been for balance. I had no problem in high school and college.
Click to expand...
You apparently had serious problems. You can't stay on any given topic.

Redo this post of yours. This time:

1. define "balance"
2. explain why you believe leftists will tolerate less tax money going to public schools.
 
IBDaMann said:
Fair enough. Which is preferable?

1. Using tax dollars to compulsorily herd children into defenselessness zones for maximum active-shooter convenience while the children are systematically programmed by a leftist political curriculum to be woke, undereducated, scientifically illiterate and mathematically incompetent HATERS

*or*

2. Give parents full control of their children's education while allowing the children to be educated in the safety and convenience of their own homes without imposing any tax burden on We the People and without supporting any teachers unions that serve no other purpose than to snuff the life out of any community education program.


Thoughts?
Click to expand...

A 17 year old girl I know went to enroll in high school as a Junior, after years of home school, they told her she didn’t qualify to be a freshman. The girls mother has been checked out after the father died 7 years ago, but thought she was doing ok in a virtual home school.

I feel awful for this girl.

The system should have had alarm bells ringing for this girl, but hey some wealthy Floridians saved money on their taxes because they got away with not educating her.
 
IBDaMann said:
You apparently had serious problems. You can't stay on any given topic.

Redo this post of yours. This time:

1. define "balance"
2. explain why you believe leftists will tolerate less tax money going to public schools.
Click to expand...

Ask T. A. He's the one who suggests balance.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
The family has been under relentless attack for 50 years. The consequences are catastrophic for the society, but look at how well it has worked out for the WOKE FUCKS.
Click to expand...
Karl Marx considered family relationships to be very bad. He considered them as class antagonisms just like any other. He sought to abolish all family relationships as well as all forms of individual identity aside from one's labor contribution to society. See below..

The Communist Manifesto:
But these Socialist and Communist publications contain also a critical element. They attack every principle of existing society. Hence they are full of the most valuable materials for the enlightenment of the working class. The practical measures proposed in them—such as the abolition of the distinction between town and country, of the family, of the carrying on of industries for the account of private individuals, and of the wage system, the proclamation of social harmony, the conversion of the functions of the State into a mere superintendence of production, all these proposals, point solely to the disappearance of class antagonisms which were, at that time, only just cropping up, and which, in these publications, are recognised in their earliest, indistinct and undefined forms only.
Click to expand...
 
IBDaMann said:
Karl Marx considered family relationships to be very bad. He considered them as class antagonisms just like any other. He sought to abolish all family relationships as well as all forms of individual identity aside from one's labor contribution to society. See below..
Click to expand...

The main excuse they used was claiming that families perpetuate and keep hidden the sexual abuse of children and general abuse of women ( Men are Evil!), therefor families must be kept under the thumb of the state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top