Homeschool World Forums     Home     Mall     Catalog     Articles     Contests     Events     Groups     Forum     Contact  
Homeschool World Forum Forum Index Homeschool World Forum
Read thousands of forum posts on topics such as homeschool law, getting started, curriculum, special needs, homeschool vs public school, and much, much more!
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Obama-homeschool stance
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Homeschool World Forum Forum Index -> Homeschool Parents / Off-Topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You won't 100% agree with any candidate, but Huckabee has the most morals and best views on current issues

Both McCain and Huckabee are advocates of big government - perhaps not so much so as Democrats would be, but still a major problem. I'd rather see Romney, or better yet, Ron Paul win.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Decrease
User


Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 125
Location: Verona VA

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 4:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem with the above quotation, it is not true. In Arkansas Huckabee expanded government under two major initiatives. One was infrastructure. We should remember that it was the Republicans who made the greatest advances in infrastructure in the history of the United States. Secondly it was education as mandated by the courts. I am not for education being government controlled, but something had to be done.

As well, Huckabee was the only one to balance a budget.

As well, if you look at his proposals from day one, they are all fiscally conservative. A year and a half ago he was proposing tax ideas (and spending ideas) that was the most conservative being put out. In fact, the liberal Newt Gingrich (tongue and cheek) said before Huckabee's surge, he was putting out the most conservative policies of any candidate. Then, when he becomes popular, he is called a liberal.

On social issues, he is extremely conservative. Which, I will say, I think it it is less than honest in the RNC field that you can be a social liberal and an economic conservative and still be called a conservative but not the other way around.

The issue for me is this. God mandated the 10 commandments to the "Federal" government not just the states. In that 10 commandments he outlawed murder--God did not leave it up to the states (tribes). Huckabee is the only person who says abortion should be decided by the federal government. All others say it should be left to the states. I do not believe murder (or slavery for that matter) should be left to the states. If Hillary Clinton was against murder of babies--she could tax me to death and I would vote for her. Why? Murder is more important than taxes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316496,00.html

Huckabee massively increased spending (65%) and state taxes ($500 million). I suppose increasing taxes is one way to finance a spending spree without increasing debt, but that's only a short-term solution, since high taxes eventually kill the economy.

Regarding abortion - moral / religious issues should be left up to the individual states.

Regarding unwanted children - the number of unwanted children shouldn't affect your stance on abortion, unless you think it's ok to murder people just because they aren't wanted. Why stop at babies? Why not old people, the homeless, etc.? This particular argument doesn't hold water, imho.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Decrease
User


Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 125
Location: Verona VA

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So you are saying that issues of murder should be left to the state? I strongly disagree. That is a political philosophy that I cannot hold onto in regards to universal moral abstracts like murder. The ramifications philosophically is that if murder is left to individual states so should slavery, genocide and any number of other moral universal abstracts.

BTW, to call some thing a religious moral law and dismissing it as such is also unreal. Morals, by their nature, are either religious or they are made up. In the philosophical realm it is impossible to account logically for morals without religion. Philosophically they are only matters of opinion or convenience for a certain segment but they are essentially illogical.

Again, I would never vote for someone based upon monetary issues first when issues of such import is the issue. I would have voted the same on slavery and hate to make life subservient to taxes.

BTW, what did those taxes go to? That has not been explained in Arkansas. that is an important issue. Reagan raised taxes higher than any other governor in the history of California when he was governor. Yet, that is only part of the story.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a choice between having the federal government decide it and having the individual states decide it. There is no third option.

Regarding moral issues vs financial issues - if the economy tanks, tens or hundreds of thousands of people die due to lack of food, health care, etc. While this certainly doesn't mean you should compromise to the point of supporting a candidate who's in favor of state-funded abortion (Giuliani), you can't just eliminate the financial end of things from consideration entirely either.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jkenney1973
User


Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, you know I came here because of the Obama homeschool issue, but this has really gone off topic. That being said let me dig some change out of my pocket and throw in my 2 cents (at my own peril of course).

Politics- They are really all basically the same once they get in office. Just once, I'd love to see an average citizen be able to have a shot at it. But, of course, with money issues that will never happen.

Abortion- While my wife and I are both against most abortions; she did have one at 16 because of sexual abuse by her stepfather. Yes, she could have given it up for adoption, but would any "rational" person have expected her to carry that child for 9 months under those circumstances?

Religion and morals- This is really the root for all this debate, isn't it? We are not religious in any way, but we still have values and morals that we believe in. And they are pretty much the same as the 10 commandments (with the one exception). Does that make us bad people?

Religion and homeschool- We live in a small E. TN county that had only one support group. While that group is inclusive, it is made up mostly of Christians. We decided that since we weren’t Christian, we didn’t want our children exposed to a lot of conflicting beliefs. And that’s really why most people home school in the first place, isn’t it?
We then started up a secular support group. There has been an inundation of responses to this. Unfortunately, 90% has been very negative and harassing calls from Christians, so much so that we had to change our phone number to an unlisted one. I know that the vast majority of Christians are not like this, but it is sad that people that “live” the values of the bible would act in such a manner.

Ok, I have no more change in my pocket. Please don’t be too harsh.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jkenney1973
User


Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ceili, I couldn’t agree with you more. Especially about the politicians we have here. I have voted Rep. for years, but I’m seriously looking into Obama because he was the first one of the viable candidates to talk convincingly about change. Of course I saw an interview with him years ago and told my wife that he might make a good president.

But of course you now have all the candidates jumping on the “change” bandwagon. Honestly, that makes me distrust them even more.

I really like Obama’s position on health care. Just make it affordable. I don’t like being mandated to have it. We know how well that’s working in Romney’s state. We’d love in have insurance, but we can’t afford it. What would we do if Clinton part 2 gets in office and she makes us pay? Sorry kids, no food this week or we’d have to pay a fine. Some may think that’s being dramatic, but it’s very true.

Besides, I think he has the #1 quality of a good leader, the ability to inspire. Reagan had it, Churchill had it, Kennedy had it, so many great world leaders were great because they inspired those around them to be and do their best. I think that’s what this country needs now more than anything.

Alright, I’ll get off the soapbox now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
momo3boys
User


Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 574
Location: Western Mass

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jkenney1973 wrote:

Besides, I think he has the #1 quality of a good leader, the ability to inspire. Reagan had it, Churchill had it, Kennedy had it, so many great world leaders were great because they inspired those around them to be and do their best. I think that’s what this country needs now more than anything.

Alright, I’ll get off the soapbox now.


I have to disagree. I just don't trust him. He just makes me nervous. I know that this isn't the best way to decide but if someone came too you door and you had that feeling would you let him in. Plus, I saw a picture of the candidates during the pledge of allegiance, and Obama was the only one that didn't raise his hand to his heart. I'm sorry but there are somethings that I just don't think a president can ignore, and pledging allegiance to the flag of the country you want to be in charge of...... Confused
_________________
Phi 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ceili
User


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jkenney1973 wrote:
Ceili, I couldn’t agree with you more. Especially about the politicians we have here. I have voted Rep. for years, but I’m seriously looking into Obama because he was the first one of the viable candidates to talk convincingly about change. Of course I saw an interview with him years ago and told my wife that he might make a good president.

But of course you now have all the candidates jumping on the “change” bandwagon. Honestly, that makes me distrust them even more.

I really like Obama’s position on health care. Just make it affordable. I don’t like being mandated to have it. We know how well that’s working in Romney’s state. We’d love in have insurance, but we can’t afford it. What would we do if Clinton part 2 gets in office and she makes us pay? Sorry kids, no food this week or we’d have to pay a fine. Some may think that’s being dramatic, but it’s very true.

Besides, I think he has the #1 quality of a good leader, the ability to inspire. Reagan had it, Churchill had it, Kennedy had it, so many great world leaders were great because they inspired those around them to be and do their best. I think that’s what this country needs now more than anything.

Alright, I’ll get off the soapbox now.


Thanks, jkenney!

I heard an interesting quote on talk radio the other day--someone said, "I don't want "change", I want IMPROVEMENT! If my doctor tells me my tumor has changed, that's not necessarily a good thing--I want to hear there's IMPROVEMENT!" Good point!

Also, I agree that leadership requires inspiration. My cousin is going for her Masters in Business and the other day she interviewed me for a paper she is writing (we own and run a corporation and I'm the Director of Human Resources) and she asked me what I thought was the key to good leadership. The first thing that came to mind for me was "the ability to inspire the best in others". You can't do it alone--arbitrarily, like some leaders try to do--you have to inspire others to do the best they can do and be the best they can be. As a leader, you also need to be a good liaison between your customers (the American People, where government is concerned) and those you lead directly (your administration). You can't sit back and act like a dictator, having total disregard for your customers and your employees.

I think Obama has what it takes in that regard. I believe he can inspire the best in people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ceili
User


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 8:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

momo3boys wrote:
jkenney1973 wrote:

Besides, I think he has the #1 quality of a good leader, the ability to inspire. Reagan had it, Churchill had it, Kennedy had it, so many great world leaders were great because they inspired those around them to be and do their best. I think that’s what this country needs now more than anything.

Alright, I’ll get off the soapbox now.


I have to disagree. I just don't trust him. He just makes me nervous. I know that this isn't the best way to decide but if someone came too you door and you had that feeling would you let him in. Plus, I saw a picture of the candidates during the pledge of allegiance, and Obama was the only one that didn't raise his hand to his heart. I'm sorry but there are somethings that I just don't think a president can ignore, and pledging allegiance to the flag of the country you want to be in charge of...... Confused


It was actually the National Anthem, not the Pledge of Allegiance--and I did see the email rumours going around about him (I find it amazing that some of my friends whom I considered to be intelligent, bought that stuff hook, line, and sinker and forwarded it in ignorance without doing any research) and I did research it and discovered that it wasn't meant as a statement of any sort by Obama--his grandfather taught him to sing during the National Anthem and put your hand over your heard during the Pledge of Allegiance. And I also found this quote regarding etiquette during the National Anthem:

"Modern custom does not require a hand over the heart, said Anne Garside, Director of Communication for the Maryland Historical Society, home of the original transcript of The Star-Spangled Banner."

If someone doesn't like him, that's fair enough, but I just hope that opinion isn't based upon malicious lies being spread via email.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ceili
User


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ncmom wrote:
...I also find it amusing that the NOT ALL but a lot of the same people who are pro killing unborn babies are the people who are anti death penalty. We can kill our children but not our criminals?...


Not interested in debating this topic (that's why my replies have been on topic until now), but I was thinking yesterday, as I read, how it's interesting that those who are pro-life are almost always pro-death penalty. That makes no sense either--why one and not the other? Yes, the plan is to put to death a murderer, but innocent people can and are put to death--even if one innocent life is taken in that situation, isn't that just as horrific?

I think the definition of an "unborn child" is where this argument seems to go awry. To have a logical debate about something, the basic starting point needs to be the same. It's not in this case. Those who are pro-life believe that a sperm and egg meeting constitutes a person, whereas an "unborn child" to someone who is pro-choice is a fetus that can live outside the mother.

So this will be an endless discussion with people going back and forth restating the same things over and over again with no conclusion.

But getting back to politics...

...the parties owning issues makes for a two-party system in which people often vote for someone in an attempt to prevent the other from winning, not because they passionately stand behind a politician. A Democrat who is pro-life would NEVER get the nomination and a Republican who is pro-choice will definitely lose. It's really unfortunate that the parties are so strictly defined. And people have been brainwashed into believing that a third-party candidate will never win--it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. That's what happened the first time Ross Perot ran--everyone I spoke to said that they would have voted for him, but they didn't want to "throw away their vote" (a media quote). I was registered Independent for years and have voted for Independents, Republicans, and Democrats (depending on the CANDIDATE), but a few years ago I gave in and changed my registration so I could vote in the Primaries. I don't always vote my party, though. I think that's rare.

Also, I think polls should be banned--they are proven to be subjective: a nun standing on a corner asking people if they are for the murdering of unborn children will get a far different poll result than a casually dressed woman asking people if a woman has the right to make her own medical decisions no matter what--the results would be totally different, even polling the same exact people. Also, psychologically speaking, there is a strong "group mentality"--and people want to be part of the "winning" team. It's been proven that poll results sway people--that's why in England, polling is (or at least was when I lived there) banned for 30-60 days prior to an election. I wish they would do that here in America.

It's sad that you won't find a Democrat who is totally on board with home schooling. I have written to candidates locally (running for Governor, Senator, etc.) asking them their views and I always get replies saying they are ok with it as long as there is strict government regulation. For some reason, that freedom of choice mentality goes by the wayside with regard to education.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
4given
User


Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 735
Location: S.Indiana

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Several have made the attempt to redirect this thread...and yet you both (Decrease and Lily) continue to hijack it. Why not take their debate to another thread, Theodore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ceili
User


Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

4given wrote:
Several have made the attempt to redirect this thread...and yet you both (Decrease and Lily) continue to hijack it. Why not take their debate to another thread, Theodore.


Sorry 4given...I got sucked into yet another side topic before reading this. I would very much like to discuss the original topic--political views with regard to education.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
4given
User


Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 735
Location: S.Indiana

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No harm, Ceili. I've almost been sucked in myself several times. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The abortion debate has been split off to a new thread. There may be a little politics mixed in over there, but I did the best I could.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Homeschool World Forum Forum Index -> Homeschool Parents / Off-Topic All times are GMT - 6 Hours (CST)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Homeschool World Terms of Use  •  Privacy Policy  •  Copyright ©1993-Now Home Life, Inc.