Posts
You can justify it all you want Candy, but this schedule is ridiculous. Candy admits it by spending three quarters of her blog justifying this ridiculous schedule. I know why there is enough time. It comes at the expense of her children's education. Think about it this way. How many teachers did you have that did laundry, baked bread, and cleaned toilets while teaching? I had exactly zero. Here is what I see as a reasonable time table to her schedule. Tell me if you think this isn't correct:
Bible study: 45 minutes
Clean all toilets (they only have two): 30 minutes (get out supplies and do a good job)
Clean shower and bath (I guess they two): 45 minutes (get out supplies, scrub corners and tile and fixtures)
Clean bathroom sinks: 20 minutes
Bleach kitchen sink: 5 minutes (this can sit there while doing other things I guess)
Do younger children's laundry: 45 minutes (not all at once but to change add detergent and fold at different times)
Home school: Now this is a tricky one. I have no experience in home school what so ever, but I would imagine that a minimum of 4 hours would be appropriate.
Exercise: 75 minutes
Total so far: 8 hours and 25 minutes (this does not include getting up, dressed, brushing teeth for all, and fixing breakfast. Now let's continue)
Work on Home binder: 15 minutes
Work on Budget: 30 minutes (prep time, bills etc)
Make menu plan : 15 minutes
Do something to bread: 15 minutes
Make grocery list: 5 minutes
Go to evening Church 2 hours (round trip, meet and greet, etc)
Total 11 1/2 hours
Now this does not include making dinner, breakfast, and lunch: 2 1/2 hours for all
Clean up after lunch breakfast dinner: 1 hour
So I came up with 15 hours and then you add 8 hours of sleep ='s 23 hours (this is left over for your getting up, brushing teeth, your own hygiene and that of the children's, using the restroom, and time to think about you. An hour, so I guess Candy is correct when she says it can be done. Yes it can, but to what expense (all your time?)? So that is the answer: THE WIFE IS NOT SUPPOSE TO HAVE A LIFE, UNLESS IT IS AT THE EXPENSE OF HER SLEEP. Great life Candy, and know I can now why women want to be like her. The martyr for the family, kind of like the Virgin Mary, huh?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
120 comments:
Ummm, we prefer not to think of the Virgin Mary as a martyr to her family. 'Cause we worship her, y'know...
Very true, I thought about Joan of Arc, Felicititatis, Blandina, or Denisa, but I just thought they were too obscure or just didn't fit to work. I also thought it might rub her wrong, too.
Well, maybe she's a slacker like me. It takes me 5 minutes to clean the potties (squirt in blue junk, close lid even though the bottle says not to, wipe outside, swish the toilet brush, flush and done!)
Then again, I have 3 little boys and a construction worker using it everyday, so I CLEAN it everyday.
Homeschooling is hard to say. In our home, homeschooling stretches across the entire day, but formal "table time" would only be a couple of hours. (We make nature notebooks, for example, which is outside finding nature, capturing it, looking it up online, drawing it, etc.)
She seems more rigid though.
Laundry is an all day affair, though.
Of course, cooking, eating, and cleaning up were not on the schedule.
Here's my take on it. I've looked at her schedule many times before and thought no way. I am a homeschool mom to 3, I try to exercise 2 hours a day (doesn't always get done), and I keep the house presentable. Laundry is done throughout the day, in between subjects or whatever - it really is not that time-consuming if you don't let it build up. However, I DO NOT make kombucha tea, homemade bread, yogurt, or any of the other stuff Candy does because there are simply not enough hours in my day for that. We eat very simple meals that maybe take 1/2 hour to 45 minutes for me to prepare. My first priority is homeschool and I easily spend 6 hours a day on the homeschooling alone, since I have to divide my time w/the kids. The only way I can exercise is to get up very early before everyone else is up, and then do more in the evening when my husband can help with the kids. I also do not have a baby or preschoolers, which take even more of your time and attention than older kids. I barely have enough time to get online, check my email, and come here and comment. I try to check her blog daily but if it's long, I usually don't have time to read it. She blogs an awful lot, and from what I understand comments on other people's blogs as well.
I do not think she can possibly do all the things she claims to do.
I'm only commenting because you asked if your time allowances sounded accurate.
Bible study: 45 minutes
*** 15-30 min is quite reasonable for morning devotion. I have friends who do a 5 min. morning devotion/Bible study.
Clean all toilets (they only have two): 30 minutes (get out supplies and do a good job)
*** I can do a good job on a toilet in 5 min.
Clean shower and bath (I guess they two): 45 minutes (get out supplies, scrub corners and tile and fixtures)
***I'd not give more than 10 min. for this. Especially if they get wiped down daily.
Clean bathroom sinks: 20 minutes
***I do this, the cabinets and the counter top in about 5 min.
Home school: Now this is a tricky one. I have no experience in home school what so ever, but I would imagine that a minimum of 4 hours would be appropriate.
***I'd say 2 hours is more than adequate for one-on-one desk time with the children she is schooling. Most subjects can be covered in 20 min.
You guys are killing me with the two hours of "formal" education for your children. I am sorry, but breakdown a regular class day and you would get about four hours total (minus music, p.e., lunch, etc.), and you guys are halving that? I don't know, but I would have to say that two hours doesn't seem like enough. That is only my opinion.
I agree with you CIC. My kids get about 4 hours of eduction in public school.
"I am sorry, but breakdown a regular class day and you would get about four hours total (minus music, p.e., lunch, etc.), and you guys are halving that? I don't know, but I would have to say that two hours doesn't seem like enough. That is only my opinion."
You don't realize how much time is wasted in a public school setting on switching classes, discipline issues, and other things. You also have to remember a teacher is dealing with a classroom full of students; I am dealing with 3. And one more thing - teachers don't spend one-on-one time with each student, assuring that each and every student understands a new concept; they spend one-on-twenty (or more) time with them. There is a big difference. I spend about 2 hours one-on-one daily with each of my children, sometimes more, sometimes less. My job is to teach them a subject and make sure they understand it, their job is to apply their new knowledge in the form of worksheets, writing essays, and working through math problems; they also do a lot of independent reading for school. So keep in mind when I say I am spending 2 hours one-on-one, that is my time with them. They still spend quite a bit of time on school work.
We homeschool through a state cyber school and they are doing the exact same things as the public school children in this area. They also score well above average (80th- 90th percentile) on their yearly state-wide standardized testing, so obviously they're getting the education they need.
I only have one child who is homeschooled as of right now. when it is an all review day we can get it done in about three hours however on a day when it is a new concept we spend a minimum of four to five hours. My son is extremely ADHD though so that may skew our hours some. Much of our time is spent trying to get him to stop looking at the butterfly out the window and focus on his work.
I just thought I would break down a typical day of homeschooling my middle child, so you can see how I can teach an entire day's worth of school to one child in 2 hours.
I'm looking back in my lesson book on a day we did around November.
1. Math - go over multiplication facts w/flash cards (5 min). Begin lesson (new concept) on distributive property, teaching how to rewrite a multiplication sentence using the distributive property. After the lesson, give several practice problems for her to work through to be sure she understands. Then assign her the math page for homework, which she will complete independently and I will check before her next lesson. (Total 1-on-1: 30 min.)
2. Spelling - she is a great natual speller, so we don't spend much time on it. I'll spend 5 minutes going over her lesson for the day (which has her studying a weekly list and doing a daily worksheet) to be sure she understands the new spelling rules. Fridays I give her a spelling test, which she usually aces. (1-on-1: 5-10 min.)
3. Language - this particular lesson is on grammar - identifying the subject (noun) of a sentence and the predicate (verb). We go through her grammar book together, she works through a couple practice problems and I make sure she understands, then she will later finish her workpage (which I will check later). (1-on-1: 15 min.)
4. Geography - our curriculum (which is the same the public schools here use) has us doing 2 geography lessons a week. This day's lesson is working with a map book, understanding western hemisphere, eastern hemisphere, the continents, four oceans, etc. There is also a workbook page to complete to show understanding, and for me to check. (1-on-1: 15 min.)
5. Science - again same curriculum as public school, and we alternate days of science and history. So this day is a science day. The lesson: learning to describe physical and chemical changes caused by weathering. There is a quick lab we do in the kitchen that takes about 10 minutes. There is no independent worksheet assigned this day, but many days there are. (1-on-1 time: 20 min.)
6. Reading - this lesson involves learning about table of contents and chapter titles to locate information; also how to accurately pronounce some names. Lesson also covers plot, characters, setting, and title. I read some of her assigned reading book (a chapter book) aloud to her, then she reads a chapter aloud to me, and then is assigned some independent reading time. (1-on-1 time: 30 min.)
There you have it. The same exact activities that were covered in public school that day (we are registered with them - my kids are enrolled in the public school and are actually seen as public schoolers who school at home) - we covered at home and it took me 2 hours, 5 min. of 1-on-1 time. Some days may be a bit more, some days a bit less, but over all 2 hours.
BTW all my kids take private piano lessons and practice daily. We also do art weekly, and my eldest studied art history for one semester this past year.
CIC,
You are mistaking "total learning time" with "Mama at the table instructing" time.
In the AM, we go over religion, math lesson, and phonics. For the littles, I do "letter of the day" activities.
The children do their spelling (writing their words, etc.) on their own, and bring it to me. I usually sit in the classroom but surf the internet, read, do "me" things. I'm "available" but I don't hover. Also I might do art activities with the littles at this time.
The children do their handwriting independently, they don't need me to watch them copy letters.
Our science takes place outside/in the kitchen.
History is the subject that takes the most "Mama" time, because I will read, instruct, help with crafts, etc.
The littles, we do finger rhymes or blocks work or Montessori activities, but again that's not included in the "table time".
We learn in many environments at our house.
CIC,
Your views are not uncommon but I really don't think you have enough practical knowledge of what a homeschooling day looks like. Many subjects can be taught at once. For instance, Bible, history, people groups, geography, language arts, grammar and spelling and reading. I can do a read aloud with my kids on... say, Jim Elliott. In that one lesson we can learn about the faith of a man and learn scriptures that led his life. We learn geography of the areas he lived and served in (Ecuador) and all about the people groups that he and the other missionaries served. We learn about grammar and spelling as my children will write the stories of what they heard. We do reading as they read to us and reading comprehension as the relate the tale back to us. They learn history as they learn about the period of time these men lived in. Homeschooling is a lifestyle - not measured in the length of time spent at a desk. Though I am incredibly blessed to have a classroom for my children, much of our learning takes place in the everyday. We do service projects and sports and so many other things as well.
Very good points, MMM. Homeschooling is a lifestyle, and when you begin homeschooling you may not even realize that, but it becomes a reality as you live it.
Curiously, all the sculptured faces you see on Mt. Rushmore - George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln - were all "homeschooled" kids. This to point out that homeschooling actually used to be the norm. Public schooling is NEW - remember that. A good thing, yes, I agree. But it's not for everybody.
As an example, Thomas Edison was homeschooled. I read a biography of Thomas Edison, and interestingly his mother didn't do much intervening at all - he is the product of a lot of self-learning, combined with self-motivation. Of course, his mother was there to guide him and encourage him, which is of utmost importance. I'm just pointing out that you don't have to spend hours on end sitting down with each child to assure they get an education. (Some children actually need this more than others - and parents should ALWAYS be aware of what is going on.)
Many amazing, important people in our society have been the product of homeschooling (and fairly, many amazing, important people have been the product of public schooling too). I think the key here in most cases (I emphasize MOST because of course there are exceptions) is involvement of the parents - where you see the parent involved and caring, you see a successful child. A few years ago, I read a really interesting book titled, "How to Raise a Gifted Child" and the main focus was that 99% of gifted children have involved, caring parents who are focused on their children's education.
CLEANING
Obviously, it depends on your definition of "clean". If I 'speed clean' I can do any one room in my home in 15 minutes. But if I'm cleaning out light fixtures and polishing all the woodwork --well that is a different story.
Since this is rapidly becoming the homeschoolers blog, I'll represent for the SAHMs who send their children to public school. I have four and they all attend public school. They all knew how to read before they started kindergarten. They all went to private preschools. They all spent lots and lots of time learning everyday with their mother. I think, it was MMM that said in another post about Mom's who check out the day the they drop their kids at kindergarten...or something to that effect. Well, maybe some do--- I've seen them myself.
But I didn't and plenty of us do not. We volunteer. We actively parciptate in our childrens' educations. We spend so much time there that they offer us jobs.
My children are considered among the "gifted" and are pulled from their classrooms to work one on one with GT teachers in specific subjects for hours at a time several days a week.
Their are good and bad in public school systems. There is more good than bad. Just like in the world.
I don't want to bash the HS, I have friends and relatives that do it. I just think that doing it because you had bad, scary, or mean teachers or fellow students is like sticking your head in the sand.
Nightowl,
You are right - here are just some of the famous homeschoolers, not counting the amazing "everyday" kids who are being sought after by top schools all around the world whose parents have endured skepticism and endless questions for the manner in which they feel led to teach their children.
Famous Homeschoolers
Presidents
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
John Quincy Adams
Abraham Lincoln
William Henry Harrison
Theodore F. Roosevelt
Governors
Patrick Henry [VA]
Charles Pickney III [SC]
Richard D. Spaight [NC]
William Livingston [NJ]
Richard Bassett [DE]
U.S. Senators and Congressmen
William S. Johnson [CT]
George Clymer [PA]
John Francis Mercer [MD]
William Blout [TN]
William Few [GA]
Scientists/Businessmen
Blaise Pascal
Booker T. Washington
Thomas Edison
Benjamin Franklin
Andrew Carnegie
John Stuart Mill
Chief Justices of U.S. Supreme Court
John Rutledge
John Jay
John Marshall
College Presidents
John Witherspoon -- Yale
Timothy Dwight -- Princeton
William S. Johnson -- Columbia
Preachers / Missionaries
John & Charles Wesley
John Owen
Johnathon Edwards
William Carey
Dwight D. Moody
John Newton
Hudson Taylor
Authors
Mark Twain
George Bernard Shaw
Irving Berlin
Charles Dickens
C.S. Lewis
Philosopher
Charles Montesquieu
Famous Women
Abigail Adams
Mercy Warren
Martha Washington
Florence Nightingale
Phyllis Wheatley
Agatha Christie
Pearl S. Buck
Generals
"Stonewall" Jackson
Robert E. Lee
Douglas MacArthur
George Patton
Artists
John Singleton Copley
Andrew Wyeth
Rembrandt Peale
Claude Money
Ansel Adams
Composers
Anton Bruckner
Felix Mendelssohn
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Francis Poulenc
ALSO:
Most Royal Families
Activists
Peter Jennings, News Anchor
This ninth grade drop out has many honors in his field.
Rebecca "Becky" Ogle, Disabilities Movement
Reed Colfax, Director, Fair Housing Project
Athletes
Venus and Serena Williams, Tennis Champions
Brianna Weissman, Figure Skater
Bobby Convey, Major League Soccer
Brittany Reitz, Tennis
Eric Jackson, Whitewater Paddler
Darrell Waltrip, NASCAR Racer
Gabe Jennings, Olympic Track & Field
Graeme Pitts
Jenny Keim, Olympic Diver
Jason Taylor, NFL
Miami Dolphins' defensive end.
Jill Dworsky, Rodeo Champ,
Jonathan Loe, Basketball
Kinsley Johnson-Hable, Skater and Aerialist
Marie Fjordholm, Gymnast
Mallery Code, Golfer
Morgan White, Gymnast
Rebecca Ward, Sabre World Title
Ryan Lusk, Swimmer
Thumper Nagasako, Rollerblader
Tyler Baze, Jockey
Authors
Christopher Paolini
Jedediah Purdy
Samuel Jero, Hobby Printer
Stefan Merrill Block
Business Success
Jimmy "Jimbo" Wales, Wikipedia Founder
Aaron Fessler, CEO
Patricia Fripp, Sales Trainer
Educators
Joyce Reed, former Associate Dean of the College, Brown University
Mathematicians
Erik Demaine
Musicians
Billy Contreras, Violinist
Michele Bolton who was invited to play French Horn at Carnegie Hall when she was 17.
Joanna MacGregor, pianist
Unconventinal pianist who has hit the classical music scene like the proverbial whirlwind. The eclecticism predates her formal musical studies. She and her two siblings were educated at home until they were 11 years old.
Josh Layne, Harpist
Josh is an exciting young musician who has recorded and produced 3 solo CDs. He performs as both a recitalist and an orchestral soloist. He began playing the harp at age 13. Because he was learning at home, he had time to develop his skills as a musician.
One Way Rider Family Bluegrass Band Newgrass and Gospel
One Way Rider is a family band performing bluegrass, newgrass, gospel, and contemporary acoustic music. Their children are homeschooled, and their son BassBoy was on the Grand Ole Opry, Jan. 5, 2002, performing his original song.
Paskowitz, Rock Group "The Flys"
Paskowitz' diverse interests ... reflect something of his eclectic education, having been home schooled with his sister and seven brothers. "We didn't have organized home schooling, it was more like we assimilated from our environment," he says.
Performing Artists (Other than musicians and singers)
David Tamaki, Ballet Dancer
Paige Crowther and David Tamaki, a soloist with The New Jersey Ballet, performed the pas de deux from 3Flames of Paris1 with The Performance of International Ballet Project.
Lisa Whelchel, Actress
Blair on "The Facts of Life," homeschools her three kids. Before you could say "no college degree," I had succeeded in teaching a kindergartner, first-grader, and second-grader "reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic." We were having so much fun, you couldn't have paid me to send my kids to school.
Spencer Breslin, Actor
8 years old and starring in Disney's "The Kid," "The Cat in the Hat," "Raising Helen," and "The Santa Claus Part 2."
Tyler Hoechlin, Actor
In many ways, the real star of Road to Perdition is California homeschooler Tyler Hoechlin, who plays 12 year-old Michael Jr. Hoechlin, in his first major role, gives a convincing portrayal of a young man who both idolizes and fears his father.
Will and Jada Pinkett Smith
This Hollywood couple has decided to homeschool their children, because they're unimpressed with America's educational system. Jada played "Annie" in "Collateral, and was also in the Matrix series. Readers Digest Story.
Zephyr Goza, Storyteller
Last winter, Zephyr had the title role in "Jack and the Beans Talk" and its complementary tales about Simple Ivan, a Russian boy, and Juan Bobo, a fable about a Mexican boy. He has toured with his parents since he was 18 months old and has been an actor since he was 3. "They couldn't keep me off the stage," he says with a chuckle.
Politicians
John and Elizabeth Edwards
We're using the curriculum from the school. We have employed a certified teacher to teach them. The thing they do get to decide is whether they come to an event or not.
Scientists & Explorers
NASA Astronaut Homeschools
Just a brief mention in the biography of astronaut Duane G. "Digger" Carey that he and his wife homeschool their two children.
Singers
Amel Larrieux, Singer & Parent
FOX: I know you have two young daughters. How do you make the time for your family, especially with your current tour dates?
AMEL LARRIEUX: Well they come with us. My 5-year-old is in kindergarten and the other is only 16 months. We may home school next year so it doesn't break us apart if we're still on the road.
Brent Tolin, Singer
Tolin, 11, who is visually impaired and has other disabilities including pituitary dwarfism and a learning disability, has been singing since he was 5 years old.
Cherryholmes: A Bluegrass Family Affair
It hasn't taken the family band Cherryholmes long to rake in accolades. They scored an upset at last year's International Bluegrass Music Awards, and their self-titled album is up for a Grammy Award on Feb. 8.
Garth Brooks, Singer
On the Howie Mandel show, one of the guests was Garth Brooks. Did you know his three daughters are homeschooled? He said his wife does all the teaching because they're too advanced for him: the girls are 2, 4 and 6! He said his family started traveling with him and it really helped to save his marriage. Homeschooling seemed like the logical choice to him.
Hanson, Singing Siblings
More than a decade after they were long-haired, tow-headed teens and their hit MMMBop saturated radio and sold millions, Hanson still is releasing strong, well-received albums, such as last year's rock-and-soul flavored The Walk, which looked at the personal and social responsibilities that come with maturity. Also available, The Best of Hanson
Tiffany Jo, International Yodeling Champion
Her Cd, Take Me Back To Tucson, was the Borders Music Store #1 Top Seller for Arizona Artist during both 2003 and 2004. Tiffany Jo also formed her own charity two years ago called Children Helping Children. Two dollars from the sale of each of her CD's goes to buy amusement park passes at the Funtasticks Amusement Park here in Tucson.
Visual Artists
Andrew Wyeth
Andrew Wyeth attended school only to third grade, and after that received his art training and all other education entirely at home.
Chelsea Moore, Film Maker
The 17-year-old was honored in New York City as one of nine winners of an international filmmaking contest for 16- to 25-year-olds.
Christian Grew, Painter
Grew has sold nine paintings since her debut exhibit at New Jersey's Bordentown Iris Festival, where she sold her first painting for $125.
Lu Pinchang, Sculptor
In 1978, the government opened up the universities to all applicants and he entered the Jingdezhen Ceramics College having only a homeschooled education. His reason for choosing ceramics over any other artistic medium or any other lifestyle is remarkable in that-as far as he explained-there really wasn't one.
Rita Ambrose and Shelley Sanders, Lighthouse Photographers
Accompanying Ambrose and Sanders on the trips is Sanders' 10-year-old son, Kyle, whom she home-schools. Kyle is learning more about history and geography than he could ever learn from a textbook and, like Grandma, he has begun taking a few photos of his own.
Anyways... the list goes on and on and on...
Barbie,
Many parents who choose to homeschool don't do it because their children couldn't learn in a traditional classroom. Many parents do it because they want to properly socialize their children, to teach them Biblical truth WHILE teaching history and everything else, to protect their children from being told that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable, so that their kids learn can be taught that evolution is what many people believe but Creation is what God has shown us in His perfectly preserved Word, to protect their children's purity from schools that will hand out contraceptives and pregnancy tests without parent permission and teach that "safe sex" is right. And so on, and so on, and so on. I'm homeschooling for education and to spare my children's souls until they are mature enough to handle the many things that are happening and discussed in traditional schools. I've got no issue with you or anyone else for choosing to send their children to public schools but I consider motherhood the highest calling and my duties don't end when they turn 5.
MMM - you scare the hell out of me. I have been lurking on here for awhile and I am disgusted enough to post. First, actors, actresses, politicians and anyone with money have REAL teachers that are homeschooling them, so that doesn't even count. I hardly think one can compare education in the 1800's to know as you pointed out Abe Lincoln and others were homeschooled. I am shocked that you think your children can get an education by reading a book to them and get all their lessons in. There are lots of people that homeschool that their kids are extremely smart and colleges are going after them, but let me assure you that your kids will not be one of them at the pace you are going. The bible is great, but isn't going to get your kids a real job in the real world. I would suspect that your child wouldn't be able to get an Engineering job, law degree, salesmen position with the education they are getting and will be lucky to get into a jr. college. There are lots of good homeschooling parents out there that are giving their kids the proper education and will be successful someday, but there are probably far more homeschoolers that won't. This mentality that the bible will teach you everything is crap. It won't teach you math and science and many other things. The bible is great for many things, but not to base your education on. I fear the welfare system is going to be more burdened that ever in about 15 years with this new wave of homeschooled children get out in the world and quote any scripture from the bible, but can not count change back to a customer.
Brushetta,
Your comment is ignorant. You make foolish assumptions if you think that my children are getting a poor education and won't have opportunities to be successful. I need not even defend those silly statements with my children's abilities. There is a whole world of homeschooling that you obviously know very little about. I was giving an EXAMPLE as to how when one plans well they can take a simple tool, such as a great book or story, and cover many bases with it. There's nothing about me that should scare you other than the fact that I am much more well researched on this topic than you on this and you look like a fool for making assumptions about me and my children.
Bruschetta,
You should fix that KNOW and turn it into a NOW or they'll tear you up around here! They consider that the ultimate in ignorance. CIC made it clear that you don't accidentally add the K to NOW.
MMM,
I think it is ignorant to think your child is getting the same education as Senator Edwards children or a lot of the other people on that list. Garth Brooks wife homeschooled by herself when they were 2, 4, 6. When they actually got to school age children, she hired a licensed teacher. AGAIN, SOME PARENTS HOMESCHOOL GREAT, BUT MANY DO NOT. YOU CAN NOT COMPARE EVERY DAY PEOPLE TO CELEBRITY HOMESCHOOLERS. THEY HIRE PROFESSIONALS.
MMM,
I did not say YOUR children were not getting a good education. I am just saying that you can not compare your child's homeschooling to the rich. I am simply stating as a whole. Stop being so defensive.
MMM,
I thought that was the running joke here to put know instead of now!
Specifically, what you said is:
MMM - you scare the hell out of me. I have been lurking on here for awhile and I am disgusted enough to post. First, actors, actresses, politicians and anyone with money have REAL teachers that are homeschooling them, so that doesn't even count.
*******
It does count if you even READ my post previous to that list of famous homeschoolers. The one I posted in response to another person.
*******
I hardly think one can compare education in the 1800's to know as you pointed out Abe Lincoln and others were homeschooled. I am shocked that you think your children can get an education by reading a book to them and get all their lessons in.
*******
This was an example of how you can take a TOOL and expand on it.
*******
There are lots of people that homeschool that their kids are extremely smart and colleges are going after them, but let me assure you that your kids will not be one of them at the pace you are going.
********
You know nothing about myself or the education my children receive in my care. You did - just above - state that my children SPECIFICALLY aren't getting a good education.
*******
The bible is great, but isn't going to get your kids a real job in the real world. I would suspect that your child wouldn't be able to get an Engineering job, law degree, salesmen position with the education they are getting and will be lucky to get into a jr. college.
*******
Another incredibly ignorant comment coming from someone who knows nothing about my family.
*******
There are lots of good homeschooling parents out there that are giving their kids the proper education and will be successful someday, but there are probably far more homeschoolers that won't.
*******
Again, what brilliant research have you based this claim on?
*******
This mentality that the bible will teach you everything is crap. It won't teach you math and science and many other things. The bible is great for many things, but not to base your education on. I fear the welfare system is going to be more burdened that ever in about 15 years with this new wave of homeschooled children get out in the world and quote any scripture from the bible, but can not count change back to a customer.
I did not mean to delete my previous comment to you - I wasn't thinking. To the best of my recollection it said something like,
"That's your defense? You have just wasted my time with that silly statement - you clearly know nothing about homeschooling and certainly even less about my children. Think what you will about myself and my children."
MMM,
No that wasn't your statement, but nice try. I think you did mean to delete it. Considering your comments through this entire blog, it really isn't worth commenting. You talk in circles.
Actually - why don't you cache the history of these comments and pull my comment up? Surely someone here can do that. That is about word for word what I said. I don't talk in circles and you can stop trying to play it off as if I changed my comment to you. Next time you are looking for a earnest debate you will have to be better prepared and it helps to stick to the topic at hand.
You got me MMM.
Wow. I am wondering why we can't call a truce here and just admit that most successful students are a product of supportive, involved parents??
Public schoolers: you care about your kids, and you are giving them the best education you deem possible, which happens to be at the public schools.
Homeschoolers: you care about your kids, and you are giving them the best education you deem possible, which happens to be homeschooling.
Sigh....I tire of the parenting wars. They ironically seem to be between the parents that care the most. (You won't see crack addicts or jailbirds arguing either way.)
Nightowl,
I think I posted earlier about why SOME of us choose to homeschool and how I don't assume it is the proper choice for everyone. It is such a personal decision and I do recognize that. This bit with Brushetta came as a result of her attack on me and her specific criticisms of myself and my children. She really had it coming.
Homeschool? Public school? Private school?
What difference does it make what one family chooses for their own children?
The important thing is that the children are educated. Period.
Barring some tragedy, all our kids will grow up to be adults in this society. The important thing is that they are, when the time comes, capable of living adult lives, with adult responsibilities and become productive, decent members of society.
If a child is learning Algebra in 4th grade or 9th grade, does it really matter in the long run? Compounded education - skills, knowledge and abilities that are taught and built upon what has already been learned - will determine the ultimate "intelligence" of a child. Who cares where that comes from, as long as they receive it?
We're all about public schools here and are more than happy with our decisions. I know several homeschoolers who are happy with their decisions. So be it.
As long as the kids are being educated and each family does what is right for them, what difference does it make to anyone else?
I, personally, don't care. If a child is 12 and can't do basic math or use basic grammar, there is a serious flaw in his/her education, regardless of the source of that education. If a child is 12 and can do basic math and grasp grammar and English, yay to the teacher, whoever it is and in whatever environment.
MMM,
You should really work on getting that "chip" off your shoulder. You are incredibly defensive. You view everything as an attack on you and your children. Here is a news flash for you. My children are all in public school and I guarantee they are not getting as good an education as a lot of the homeschooled children you mentioned. I was just pointing out that not all homeschooled children are getting a good education. I simply commented on the one example you gave of your homeschooling that I did not agree with. People are allowed to disagree with you, right? I think I am intelligent enough to realize that is not the only way you homeschool, but this is a blog one is free to express their opinions.
Tia,
I totally agree with you, it is a personal decision for EACH family to make based on their individual wants and needs.
Brushetta,
You started your first post off to me with, "You scare the hell out of me" and then jumped into making inappropriate, uneducated and offensive statements about the my children. You came out of nowhere with that and I have every right to respond to such statements as you directed right at me. I don't have a chip on my shoulder - I just find you to be offensive, ignorant and quick to judge. This really isn't worth discussing as you have no intelligent defense for the statements you made to me.
You scare the hell out of me, looking at all your posts on this site and others. I wasn't commenting on just this topic, Mrs. Intelligence.
BOO!
MMM-
Barbie,
Many parents who choose to homeschool don't do it because their children couldn't learn in a traditional classroom."
*** I didn't say they couldn't. ***
"Many parents do it because they want to properly socialize their children,"
*** Interesting, I've never heard that argument in favor of home schooling. I'll have to give it more thought. ***
"...to teach them Biblical truth WHILE teaching history and everything else,..."
*** We do this as well. Being Catholic we call it Religious Education both at home and at church. I've already explained our participation in the other aspects of their education. ***
"...to protect their children from being told that homosexuality is perfectly acceptable,..."
***hmmm... should we really start this argument? But I pray that you never have to test your unconditional love for your children or family member because of their sexual orientation. Well, in all honestly I'll just pray for those you love.***
"...so that their kids learn can be taught that evolution is what many people believe but Creation is what God has shown us in His perfectly preserved Word,..."
***I have four children ranging from first through seventh grade. You could ask ANY of them what we believe. And NEVER has any teacher ever presented evolution as a replacement for Creation.***
"...to protect their children's purity from schools that will hand out contraceptives and pregnancy tests without parent permission and teach that "safe sex" is right.
***It all returns to the culpability of the parents' teachings in the end. Again my kids know what we believe appropriate.***
"And so on, and so on, and so on. I'm homeschooling for education and to spare my children's souls until they are mature enough to handle the many things that are happening and discussed in traditional schools. I've got no issue with you or anyone else for choosing to send their children to public schools but I consider motherhood the highest calling and my duties don't end when they turn 5."
*** I think you do have a bit of an issue, otherwise you wouldn't feel the need to defend your choice so much. And when you say, " I consider motherhood the highest calling and my duties don't end when they turn 5." it completely insinuates the contrary about those of us choosing public schools. Your list of famous homeschoolers only further emphasized your need to defend. ***
Should I shut down the blog with a list of all the famous public schooled people?
I know MMM now I'm an asshole too.
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
Why would I call you an asshole? You didn't say anything inappropriate at all. I don't have any problem with any of your points. My posting to you stated why some people do homeschool and ended with why we do and also that I respect each families decisions to do what is best for their children.
My list of famous homeschoolers was just building off a post by Nightowl about that same thing. I apologize if you feel as if I look down on anyone for not homeschooling - that wasn't my intention and it is not representative of how I feel towards other parents. I don't really worry too much about my neighbor's parenting as I have plenty to focus on in my own home. I'm don't think I'm defending homeschooling all that much - I was engaged in a discussion with one individual who made specific comments to me. I have only responded to the specific comments made towards me. Again, I have no reason at all to think you are an asshole. Are you looking to debate something specific with me?
I have to say that Nightowl I really appreciate you playing referee. It was very kind and well spoken. -And I actually agree. But I must say that is one of the very reasons I find the time volunteering in the public school system SOOOO very important. My kids do get enough. But it's the kids that don't who I (and many others like me) get to spend time with reading, doing flash cards, homework, testing, tutoring, BUT most importantly showing them that they are worth the time that makes that time valuable.
The world is bigger than just my family. There are more children in it than just my own.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I believe that some, even many, women can and do do all that Candy claims to do. For instance, laundry, bread baking, etc... is a lot of down time. It's not like you stand over your bread for 90 minutes waiting for it to rise. You could start your kid on a worksheet, then go scrub the toilet quick.
BUT, I don't believe that CANDY does all that she claims to do. She spends far too much time commenting, blogging, and updating her Meez to acomplish all that she claims
hi amanda :)
Welcome - it's been interesting here tonight! You've made good points on this. We're all human. I surely have plenty left undone more often than not.
We SHOULD scare the hell out of you. We are nonconformists dedicated to raising thinkers, not sheep; people, not factory workers.
The Bible is essential, even if you are not Christian, to understand the great books and Western Literature. We use "bible language" all the time - "turn the other cheek", "David and Goliath", "parted like the Red sea", and so on. There are too many metaphors and analogies used in common language to even list. I think any educated person should have at least a cursory understanding of Bible stories and parables.
That said, I DO agree that the key is involved, supportive parents who continue education at home. I've done all kinds of combos of private/public/homeschool depending on what my children need. (Last year, I had three homeschooled and 1 public schooled.)
Amanda, you're right about the multitasking!
The stupidest piece of time management "advice" I ever read was, "to start the laundry, then go make the bed. Clean the stove while the dishwasher is running! You'll find time you didn't know you had!".
Like anyone stares at the dishwasher waiting for it to finish. Puh-leaze.
MMM, be careful. You said: "I've got no issue with you or anyone else for choosing to send their children to public schools but I consider motherhood the highest calling and my duties don't end when they turn 5."
I am all for being passionate, but that insinuates that parents whose children attend public school have made a conscious decision to stop parenting their child when said child entered school. Nothing, and I mean nothing, could be further from the truth for 99% of parents in the world.
I also work a job outside the home. If you think giving up parenting ended when school started I'd hate to hear your opinion on two income households.
I am just saying - be careful. I think you make valid points, as does everyone else. But, like almost everyone does at one time or another, you are letting your emotions get the better of you and you are making sweeping statements with implications that you may not want to make.
My four children attended private school through the eighth grade and then transferred to a public high school. All four have college educations and are successful, happy, compassionate and Christian people. I did not "check out" when they went off to school and I take offense to that statement. I worked my tail end off while the kids were in school (housework, farm work, etc.) so that I could be "there" for them 100% when they returned home. I also spent many hours volunteering my time and talents to help less fortunate students in our school system. I think homeschooling is great for some - it just was not for me. I wanted my children to see first hand how important it is to be a positive, contributing member of society. They saw and they are. Let's not forget the less fortunate, neglected children who have parents that never really "checked in."
Tia,
Point well taken. I see how my wording could come across as that but it was not what I meant. For me, I do believe that motherhood is all encompassing. It is a joy to have my children with me all day - MOST of the time. I did not mean to offend and I did not mean to say that mother's who send their children to traditional schools care less.
However, I think to say 99% of the parents in the world feel any which way is likely a gross misrepresentation. I feel terribly for the millions of children whose parents treat the school systems like a daycare. I am glad that there are some people in the schools who can care for those children and influence them in positive ways. The world is full of great people who were magnificently influenced by a caring teacher when there was no one at home to give that time and attention.
Like anyone stares at the dishwasher waiting for it to finish. Puh-leaze.
um, well, that would be my 11 year old... while he tries to avoid his next chore.
Kids spend close to eight hours at public schools, and I am taking only half of that time as actual learn time. So I think I have grasped the amount of time that is wasted during an entire day. I have no practical knowledge of home schooling what so ever. None, zero, zilch, so I am definitely speaking from ignorance over empirical experience. Kiara it is sounding like you are multitasking your children's education. I don't know, I don't home school, but I still have a hard time with the two hours of class room work (if that is only in depth time, and excludes work sheets, reading, or other activities that a child can do on their own, and it adds up to something more than two hours, great.). It does not sound like enough time to teach children: math, English, history, science, grammar, composition, and socialization. It just sounds like a condensed version of education. If you are following the same guidelines as the public schools and you are able to quantify your results (i.e. state standardized test, well you got me there I guess) then I can't really argue. We send our son to public school but work with him outside of this education to better him. Sure that in the beginning, before public schools became accepted practice, people were home schooled, but they also usually only went to fifth grade and then went and worked on the farm, so I really don't buy that argument. Here is the other flaw to these are the famous people who have been home schooled, that list is bland compared to the famous people that attended formal education schools. That would include almost everyone else. The other flaw in that argument is it assumes that I am arguing home schooling is bad, I am not. I am arguing that some home schooling is bad. It is bad if you do not have a high school degree, if you are not knowledgeable to teach, and if you don’t teach enough. Those are my arguments against some home school curriculums. It also assumes that all these people were home schooled just two hours a day, which I don't think that was proven either. This is the difficulty in having this discussion. Too many people take what they are doing and assuming that I am saying what you are doing is wrong by just discussing the idea. You have to some how take the personal side out of the story and not get offended. I understand it is hard due to the appearance of me calling your baby dumb, basically, but that is not my argument. My argument is that you are multitasking your day which competes with your child’s education, that is the hard and scary point of home schooling. If you follow that schedule of Candy I think it is difficult not to see how time is coming out of her children’s education to bake bread.
I don't think they are teaching that homosexuality is acceptable in public schools these days. Yes they teach evolution, and I guess we can get into that argument versus Creationism (which I find a laughable approach to teaching how we were created), and yes I understand that it is a rough social puzzle in public schools as well. No, wait yes let's discuss Creationism, for sure let us discuss that. Dinosaurs
If you want to be scared by non conformist, come to my house.
I would also like to point out that the advantages of home schooling (more one on one time, better in depth discussion of topics, and the knowledge that the lessons are being absorbed) seem to be lost for the sake of teaching the same lessons as public schools but quicker.
99% was an intentional exaggeration.
If a child is parented up until age five, how many parents will give up then? I'm not talking about those who weren't parented up to that point. I'm not talking neglect, etc. since birth.
I do not believe that a parent would just stop parenting after five years. I like to have more faith in humanity.
Has anyone seen this new stuff by the "Hubby"?
Here is the commentor he is responding to:
I personally do not have to use government programs however I certainly understand how someone could as I have a special needs child and have dealt with the financial situations. You can believe and seek in the Lord plenty but that does not change the fact that your child has to have thousands of dollars worth of therapy and medication. The Lord does not say that if you believe in him life will be perfect and you will have no financial struggles. I am not trying to condemn but I feel that this statement blindly comes from someone who has not had to deal with the financial hardships of a special needs child. I would never wish that on anyone but until you deal with it personally you will never understand it. Private churches and friends would never be able to help even without taxes because the bills can be downright astronomical. I have no problem having my taxes go to help people in need as it is a compassion thing that comes from within. Sure there are people who abuse the system but honestly I would rather know that those who need it are really helped and a few abuse it then to think that I could have helped but did not.
Nicole | Homepage | 07.05.08 - 3:08 pm | #
-----------------------------------
And Now for Hubby's Diatribe:
-----------------------------------
Nicole
It is not a matter of whether or not anybody or everybody agrees with Government Handouts. It is a matter of whether or not the Government has the authority to FORCE one person into the Involuntary Servitude of another.
According to the founding documents of this country, no Government, King, Majority Vote or any other earthly power has the authority to FORCE one person into the Involuntary Servitude of another person. According to the founding documents of these united States, any Government that violates the God Given Human Right of Liberty, must stop doing it, or it is the Right and Duty of the Citizens to eliminate that Government.
So when you advocate that the Government steal from one person in order to help another person, you are advocating for a Government that you should be eliminating.
Also, when you say that the Government should violate the Rights God gave me because somebody needs it, you demonstrate that you do not believe Jesus when he said to first seek the Kingdom of God (do what is right) and your earthly needs will be met. Matt 6:33
Faith goes a long way toward seeing miracles of God. What if refusing to take the ill gotten gain of Government Handouts, would cause God to miraculously heal the person with the health problems? Shadrack, Meshack and Abednigo were will to do what was right upon pain of death, that's when God showed up.
Erik neglects to mention that money - currency - is the property of our government. It is not "labor in stored form". It is a product that we barter our time for. We GIVE our labor for money, and because we GAVE our labor away, we don't have it anymore.
Paper money is worthless without the government - can you spend Confederate money? (Well, you CAN make $ on eBay with it, I'm sure!)
The founding documents of our country, and the basis of the Revolutionary Way, was to protest taxation without representation. NOT to protest any and all taxes.
"Render unto Caesar"... Christ Himself told us to pay our taxes.
With regards to homeschooling it can be done in less than 4hrs for the younger children. Our K age child (5)is done with school in about 1.5 hrs. Our 3rd grade child (7) is done in about 3.5hrs. When they are done with all their work that can be done on their own (handwriting, math after taught to them, reading, etc) they play school with their 3yr old sister when I can't have one on one time with her. It is easier to have schooling time done in a less amount of time when you don't have 30 children to teach.
"According to the founding documents of this country, no Government, King, Majority Vote or any other earthly power has the authority to FORCE one person into the Involuntary Servitude of another person. According to the founding documents of these united States, any Government that violates the God Given Human Right of Liberty, must stop doing it, or it is the Right and Duty of the Citizens to eliminate that Government."
Here is your answer to the founding father's document that prohibits one man to force another into involuntary servitude. It is the reason it is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and not life liberty and property. Here is the answer Dumb Ass as far as why you are wrong about our founding fathers: wait for it........SLAVERY.
Everyone missed the purposeful know now issue at the end.
CIC (I really wish I had a proper name with which to address you by),
I have no inclination to debate with you over Creationism vs. Evolution. I have my feelings and they are rooted in my faith. You have clearly stated that you don't share my faith, at this point, and though I pray that someday we will share in the Kingdom of God I recognize that at this point we are divided on this. I am not interested in trying to convince you of something you don't believe in. As for homosexuality and what is taught in schools, I'd be more than happy to back that up with what I've come across but this isn't the time or the place. Further, I don't care to come across as someone who hates homosexuals because it simply isn't true. I made a comment that ONE of the MANY reasons that SOME parents who homeschool choose that path is because they want to protect their children from teachings that they believe to be contrary to their moral values.
As for your comments on homeschooling, yes, there are good and bad. Nothing else, at least by me, needs to be said on that. I never got involved in that long debate to defend homeschooling - I was responding to a criticism of myself and my children. I'm quite satisfied with the quality of our teaching methods and the capabilities of our children vs. their peers so I see no reason to discuss it further.
"would also like to point out that the advantages of home schooling (more one on one time, better in depth discussion of topics, and the knowledge that the lessons are being absorbed) seem to be lost for the sake of teaching the same lessons as public schools but quicker."
I am assuming this is directed toward me, since I mentioned that I homeschool through the public schools here, but I'm not sure what you mean by that statement. The reasons I homeschool are very personal but one reason in particular is that my kids learn much faster and better in a homeschool environment. One of my children could not learn to read at public school, and when I began homeschooling, this child was reading everything in only a couple of months.
I took the time in an earlier comment to show you a typical day I spend homeschooling one of my children. She learns everything she would at the public school, and she scores well above average on standardized tests. Children can be taught an entire day's worth of school in 2 hours when taught one-one-one and it is being done all across America every day. I can also assure you that just because your child is in a school building for 8 hours does not mean that he is getting 8 hours of direct teaching. There is time spent doing worksheets, reading, answering questions, researching, writing, and other independent activities. A child in elementary school would simply not retain hours upon hours of lecturing - a child needs to learn a new concept (the lesson taught by the teacher) and then needs to practice and apply that new knowledge. That is what education is about, whether they are at home or at a school building.
Nightowl,
That was very nicely put. I'm sure tens of thousands of homeschoolers around our country would be in complete agreement with you.
CIC,
I'm not interested in opening up a debate on this and am just replying to your comment below:
I don't think they are teaching that homosexuality is acceptable in public schools these days.
Here are just a few links if you'd like to examine this issue further.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49666
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54420
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/448/CFI/cfreport/index.htm
http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/bpnews.asp?ID=23077
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49813
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/jul/05071106.html
When I read some comments on here, I feel like the song "the wheels on the bus go round and round" plays. Someone says one thing and the person spins it into something else and then completely tries to steer away from it after confronted.
MMM, tolerance is never, ever a negative thing to teach children. Tolerance doesn't mean they're "turning gay" or being recruited. I hope to hell your four boys are all heterosexual. If not, they'd probably rather die than tell mommy and sadly, that is part of the reason for such high suicide rates among gay teens. Fear of their parents disapproval and no longer being loved and accepted for who they are.
Creationism isn't taught in schools because it is a religious concept. Religion is not taught in public schools because you can have students who are atheist, agnostic, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu and any other of the thousands of religious belief systems in the world - all thinking they are the ones with the truth while everyone else is wrong. Well, ya' can't all be right, and the public schools system knows that. How could they possibly balance them all? You don't!! That is why none of them are taught in the schools that exist for all of the public. Evolution is a theory thus, it's name "The Theory of Evolution". It is taught as such. It was when I learned it more than 30 years ago and it is today with the next generations. Evidence is given, concepts are explored, and then they move on to the next topic in science class. Students are not pummeled every day with a scientific theory. There are way too many other topics to cover in class to spend the inordinate amount of time on evolution that so many anti public school people believe. I've never seen any evidence in my school system to suggest otherwise. Of course, all school systems are not created equally; maybe I'm just among the lucky ones, but I tend to think otherwise.
I prefer kids who learn to accept all human beings as just that, human beings. I prefer kids learn that there are differing views and opinions in the world, and it is up to them to choose what they believe and what is right for them, given the evidence and their own thought processes. I prefer this not only for the kids in my family, but for the kids in my community as well. All kids are the future of this country and it terrifies me to think of the coming generations growing up with such bigotry and lack of respect for human dignity.
I am so tired of the homosexual/evolution "arguments" against public schools I could puke.
I have never once heard an argument relating to either of these two topics and the public school system that isn't full of bias, falsehoods, sources that are anything but credible and that aren't dripping with exaggeration and flat out imagination.
I also meant to say you may want to read some information about homosexuality and education from sources that are not biased. All the links you provided have stated, obvious agendas. Read something from a source with an opposing viewpoint, opposing experience, or even a totally and complete unbiased viewpoint.
I refuse to ever use one place, or one way of thinking, as sources for anything. From what health decisions to make to what to believe to what is going on in the world. It opens a world of wonders for people and you might be amazed if you tried it.
Brushetta,
If you wish to criticize myself or another poster, maybe you be decent enough to specifically name who you have an issue with and give specific examples instead of generalizations. Your last comments on this page and the other page don't hold much weight if you can't back them up with solid examples.
Tia - if you weren't a woman, i would marry you. you know...because, homosexuals are evil. they CHOOSE that lifestyle or the schools make them that way. i can't decide which morons side i should take. i hope non of my kids will be homosexuals, because life is hard enough as it is, but i certainly will love them just as much as i do now if not more to make up how society will treat him/her.
Oh MMM, there you go being defensive again!!! Seriously, do your shoulders hurt from that chip??
tia,
As you have stated, you are not a Christian woman. We do not share the same beliefs or values. Because of that I have no need to explain myself to you. You make absurd assumptions about myself and my family. As for the links I left for CIC, he can take or leave them. The sources are reliable and I could have listed dozens more. There are basic facts without bias as to what has, is and will happen in schools regarding the teaching of the homosexual lifestyle. Further, there are homeschooling families that don't want their children being read stories about Kings marrying each other and being educated out of textbooks that display images that deny the sanctity of what they believe marriage to be and sex ed classes that address homosexual behaviors. You surely don't have to agree with my views as you don't hold yourself accountable to Biblical teaching but you know nothing about my family and what our children have been taught in regards to this so your accusations are without substance.
Hey everyone...we know nothing about MMM's family. Ok MMM, you shouldn't have to put that in your posts anymore because I just told everyone and you have a dozen times or more. WE GOT IT!!!
Seriously Brushetta,
Your posts lack substance.
DITTO!
How incredibly rude brushetta. At least the other posters that have a differing view then MMM, have been considerate in their posts. You have not. You have been rude and nasty. They have laid down the facts as they have known them and so has MMM. Everyone here has valid arguments. You have just been plain rude, and might I add, with regards to how Candy and Erik have treated their commenter's, you are just the same.
Ginger, you told me.
P.S. I thought you were never coming back here? I guess that post dedicated to you just flattered you too much to stay away!
Also Ginger, I stopped trying to have any sort of mature dialogue with MMM, because anytime you tell her something she is wrong about she spins it into something else and she just goes in circles. Exhausting, I tell you! She also like to turn posts around to tell you that Candy indeed is not a liar or maybe, but who cares about her lies because she makes some awesome bread with hooch and bubbles.
Sorry sweety, I said, I would not post again on here. I stopped till I read about me and yes, I posted. Since then, I have read but not posted again till your attacks on MMM. I never did say, I would not read on here. It is one thing to have a blog about Candy on if she is lying or not, but, it is entirely a different thing when you are being nasty to someone who has stated several times she is not for or against Candy and has even agreed to many of which the owner of this blog and other posters have said. What do you have against MMM? You have only been out to get at MMM. She has been entirely to gracious to you.
Brushetta,
You said:
She also like to turn posts around to tell you that Candy indeed is not a liar or maybe, but who cares about her lies because she makes some awesome bread with hooch and bubbles.
Please back this ridiculous statement up with a quote where I said this. I'd enjoy nothing more than a mature debate with an individual who can defend their statements with solid facts.
Ginger,
She has no point, no class or anything to back up the nonsense she continues on with.
A little questionnaire.
Public Schoolers:
Have your children had sex education in public school?
If yes, were they taught ANYTHING about homosexuality? If so what?
Two of mine have. NEVER not once is homosexuality brought up ever. AND yes I do know this for a fact.
First I request to preview the tapes and written materials in advance.
Second I attend the parent information sessions.
And finally I discuss all of it with my child.
That said we have always used anatomically correct names for body parts and we answer all questions honestly.
Oh, MMM, find your sense of humor.....PLEASE!!!! You do turn a lot of posts about Candy into something it is not. My opinion and I am sure others would agree. Everyone, she never said that statement and I don't recall putting anything in quotes that you did say that statement. You do like to spin Candy though and other topics.
P.S. I love you Ginger! Oh, and I prefer vile over nasty.
Brushetta,
"Oh, MMM, find your sense of humor.....PLEASE!!!! You do turn a lot of posts about Candy into something it is not. My opinion and I am sure others would agree. Everyone, she never said that statement and I don't recall putting anything in quotes that you did say that statement. You do like to spin Candy though and other topics."
You and I are not friends, I'm not joking around with you so there is no need for a sense of humor when you continue to make the accusations in regards to me as you do. I don't spin anything. I've yet to earnestly defend Candy. I've commented only on topics that have come up that I happen to have personal knowledge of, nothing more. You continue, for whatever reason, to want to engage me.
Brushetta,
I am glad someone does, Where has MMM turned comments about Candy around?
Just read alot of your posts MMM. If you haven't deleted them.
It's odd, but earlier today when I referenced someone constantly being adversarial on this blog in their commenting -another blogger pinpointed MMM as that person.
I didn't say anyone specifically and tried to keep it light while making my point, yet here she is again engaged in name calling and an ugly battle of words.
I've seen her write on Ginger's blog I think that she should not waste her time here either and wishes she could stay away. But it would seem MMM is one of the lead contributers here. Morbid Curiosity?
You participate in these little "engagements" if you really thought yourself above it you wouldn't respond.
I'm not trying to antogonize, but Ginger needs to hop off the bandwagon. You at least veil your vile.
My kindergarten daughter's teacher was quite open about living in an unmarried (heterosexual) relationship. She didn't see a need for marriage (and she was in her 60's!) I also had issues with my second grader learning that "touching yourself is normal".
The school system in CO that I declined to put my children in, they really DID have books like "Heather has two Mommies".
This is in addition to plain inaccuracies, such as "Kwanzaa = ancient African tradition", and other PC junk. Why is it so hard to admit Kwanzaa was made up 40 years ago? Why alter history?
My high school that *I* attended had sex ed during "US Geography" class, a gay student club, and special events during gay pride week. (No heterosexual pride week, though.) And cross dressing by the football team, but that was just during homecoming week, LOL!
That and the fact that I think most of the history taught in mainstream schools is intrincically racially/gender biased, and it just gets under my skin.
My rant about that here:
http://milehimama.blogspot.com/2007/02/montessori-monday-why-i-hate-february.html
A little questionnaire.
Public Schoolers:
Have your children had sex education in public school?
If yes, were they taught ANYTHING about homosexuality? If so what?
Two of mine have. NEVER not once is homosexuality brought up ever. AND yes I do know this for a fact.
First I request to preview the tapes and written materials in advance.
Second I attend the parent information sessions.
And finally I discuss all of it with my child.
That said we have always used anatomically correct names for body parts and we answer all questions honestly.
Yes, sex education has been covered. 5th, 7th & 9th grades at age appropriate levels.
Parents receive a permission slip and a copy of the class materials. If permission is not given, the child goes to study hall and is not in class on those days. In 9th grade it is a semester long.
They covered anatomy, sexual intercourse, birth control, reinforced that abstinence is the only sure way to prevent disease and pregnancy, and they answered questions of the students. Questions were summarized, as well as answers, and sent home to parents.
Homosexuality was "covered" in 9th grade, but it wasn't promoted. It was explained. It was discussed. And the kids were allowed to ask questions, again, and receive educated, researched answers. They were taught that sexual preference does not negate a person's rights as a human being. They were taught that homosexuality is not a reason for hate, name calling or harassment. They were told that every human being on the planet is due the same respect as every other human being on the planet.
Parents were allowed to be in any of the sex ed classes if they so chose. This facilitated open, real conversations at home between family members without a child misinterpreting what he/she heard or a parent doing the same. Basically, they were not "taught" homosexuality; they were taught about respect and human dignity and human rights.
Homosexuality was not a topic in the lower grades with one exception. Last year, the 3rd grade class had a new student. He is a foster child in the care of a lesbian couple in the district. They are hoping to adopt him. In order to prevent "knee jerk" reactions or any other kind of action/reaction based on this, both the third grade classes were given short pamphlets about what makes a family; the gist of it was that love makes a family, period. The parents were notified before the pamphlets were handed out and were allowed to request their child not receive one. None did. It is also relevant to note that the boy is black while his foster parents are white, so issues of race were also discussed and explained. The end of year party was at his house and all but 3 members of his class attended - and those three didn't attend due to prior commitments that had nothing to do with the boy's family.
I'm proud of my community and I am proud of how the school system handles "controversial" issues.
Tia,
If my children had a school system like that, I might have left mine in school. However, it is much different.
Ginger,
If one wants their public school system different they should be an agent for change, actively advocating for causes, facilities and resources.
You already own, change it for the better.
Tia,
If your dance card isn't full already, can I have the next one?
You are very well spoken.
I have a homosexual sibling and therefore much exposure. Many conversations later, I would say that no one chooses it. We've all heard that before. But I would also say that I don't think everyone is born that way. Sometimes life is tragic and the world and people are cruel and inhumane. And sometimes to survive you adapt.
We've only had sex ed through the 6th grade here -taught progressively at 4th grade level.
Have your children had sex education in public school?
If yes, were they taught ANYTHING about homosexuality? If so what?
My kids are too young for me to answer this for them, but it wasn't that long ago that I was in public high school, so I'll answer for myself.
We did not have sex-ed, though we did have an all-school, abstinence-only assembly. At no point, in all my time at public school, was homosexuality brought up.
And, for the record, evolution was discussed for one day, as a theory. (And my teacher very much believes in evolution as opposed to creation, so I find it impressive that it was only discussed for one day.)
I forgot to mention I'm 24, to give you a reference of when I was in high school.
Well I think regardless of someone's religion they can share the same values. Christians do not own the rights to being morale, and the two are not exclusively mixed. To state just because someone is not a Christian means you do not share the same values is a leap in logic and a non sequitor. MMM and Ginger: You both have stated that the lies that do not relate to the reasons you read Candy's blog are irrelevant to the both of you. You have both fell back on the heels of basically that she bakes great bread and you pick up home making skills from her. AS a matter of fact, Ginger even baited us by saying if you find a lie, a true lie (because she questions our honesty) maybe she would consider looking at Candy differently. Well those lies were exposed, but because they were not lies about her bread or yogurt they don't count. I find homosexuality like a persons religion as long as it is not being thrown on me I don't have a problem with it. If you truly feel it is wrong and a choice, it will be dealt with by God. I can't picture why anyone would want to be gay. It has a stigma, it is not accepted, and look at the loving open armed reception that they are received with by Christians.
Taking someone else's values to task and saying "well, you said you're not a Christian" is generally the way fundamentalist Christians deal with me and those like me. I don't fit into a mold and they can't figure me out or what my motives are, so they fall back on saying I am irrelevant or don't count since I'm not a Christian. For some reason, when a fundamentalist Christian says to me "you even said you are not a Christian" they think they are insulting me. Whatever. If it makes them feel better, I ignore it and move on. It carries much more weight with them than it does with me.
I've been reading here for a while, but I've never commented. I agree with 99% of what I've read here, and I agree that Candy is mental. I've been reading her blog for ages--it's like watching a trainwreck, you just can't stop.
What I mainly wanted to comment on here, is the idea that you can't homeschool well in 2 hours a day. I homeschool my 3 children, and currently they are in grades 4 and 1 (the 1st graders are twins). We usually begin our schooling around 8:30 and finish up around noon. So, longer than 2 hours, but only a little. My 4th grader just tested (we test every year) and she was in the 96th percentile, and has been within one to two points of that every year. I only work with them formally for about 2 hours, but they work on things on their own all throughout the day.
In a day, I read aloud for at least an hour (anything from poetry, to historical fiction, science and even Shakespeare, usually I cover at least history and science daily), and the children have independent work at the kitchen table--always math/language arts, but sometimes timeline projects or science experiments.
I go over their assignments with them, helping them to learn new concepts. My 4th grader is currently writing a novel (her second) and is anxious to get to the library this week so she can learn more about World War II after looking up an entry in our encyclopedia and discovering that both her great grandfathers fought during that war.
My twins are obsessed with anything to do with space, video games and cooking. One of them does his math workbook for fun (he plans to be a "video game maker" and he found out that you need to be good at math, so he decided he needed more practice). The other twin is a gifted artist, and he thinks he'd like to be a comic book artist, or maybe a chef, depending on the day.
I'm not saying that Candy is doing a good job homeschooling...I doubt that she is. I don't homeschool because I'm afraid of public schools. In fact, I'm giving all of them the option of public high school if they want to go. I homeschool for many reasons, but one of them is the fact that I want my children to be able to think for themselves, and I want them to have time to delve deeply into whatever they feel passionate about.
I could go on and on, but that isn't really what this blog is about, so I'll stop here.
Tia,
I don't believe you to be irrelevant. I would never say that you don't count. I said:
We don't share the same beliefs or values and as a result I do not need to explain myself to you.
I don't have any idea what your moral compass is like and I don't assume that you have a lack of morals at all. What I said is that because you are not a Christian, with your life being directed by Biblical teaching, you and I might see some issues differently. Because we probably wouldn't agree on the the core issue/s at hand I can't see any reason to debate them with you. I do not wish to argue with you. I do not wish to try to change your thinking and I do not wish to use this blog for examination of a topic that I never even said was a big issue to me. I respect that you and I are very different people and that we are not necessarily like minded. I'm assuming the Christian faith and some of the beliefs that are commonly held by Christians are things that as mature women you and I should be able to agree to disagree on. I was not, in any way, trying to insult you. I don't believe I have said anything specifically rude or insulting to you anywhere on this blog. However, you made incredible assumptions about my family when you stated:
I hope to hell your four boys are all heterosexual. If not, they'd probably rather die than tell mommy and sadly
I surely hope that they are heterosexual but the rest of your statement is completely inappropriate. No where on this blog have I been intentionally unkind to you or made attacks on your mothering or family life.
You have yet to show SOLID proof, I checked out your references, the site for the inductions only go back to 2000 from what I can see, if it goes back further then that show me. I know I read somewhere that he was inducted in the 90's. So if that induction site only shows from 2000 on, naturally you won't find that information on there. The Mensa is completely hearsay at this point. We have a relative or someone who has a vendetta against Candy, and we have a neighbor of sorts who basically thinks Candy is weird. Hey I agree! I never said I was a fan of Candy's. I am also not anti-Candy. Never made her bread, not a sourdough person. I do not ferment things either, at least not on purpose.
The relative, if really concerned, would stand up and say who they are as well as well as take measures to help the children. The only concern they have is losing their information source so they can gossip here. That is what I am reading.
I have a family member who is a lesbian living in a committed relationship, and she is also a school principal. I don't agree with her lifestyle and my kids are aware of that, she is a very nice person and DOES have values. She & her partner have adopted children and they play with my kids. Some Christians automatically assume that all homosexuals are living "vile, disgusting" (just had to use that) lifestyles, but they do not. These people have a nice home in a nice neighborhood, the children are happy and well-adjusted, they don't smoke or get drunk or do drugs or have orgies or party hard. They are hard-working, kind, treat others with respect, and are nice to talk to. As a practicing Catholic, I do not agree with people living out a homosexual lifestyle; however that is NOT for me to judge, it is between them and God. But I will also say that to me, their lesbian lifestyle is not enough for me to turn my back on them. There are heterosexuals who are married and do lead disgusting lives (laziness, taking advantage of the system by living off welfare, doing drugs, etc.). I am amazed how so many Christians automatically seem to hone in on "the homosexuals" as the worst type of lifestyle there is, when there are so many things that are far worse.
Ginger - you might want to learn how to navigate a website properly. It clearly shows that it goes back to 1973.
http://www.invent.org/hall_of_fame/1_1_search.asp
Also, click on inventor and type in his name. Guess what comes up?? NOTHING!
CIC,
In response to:
MMM: You both have stated that the lies that do not relate to the reasons you read Candy's blog are irrelevant to the both of you. You have both fell back on the heels of basically that she bakes great bread and you pick up home making skills from her.
I've not sifted through the archives here but I don't know if I said her lies are irrelevant exactly. I do believe I had said at some point that there were things I didn't know enough about to judge her. I know for a fact that I've never said anything about her bread baking skills. I really don't know that I actively pick up homemaking tips from her either. The only homemaking tip I think I've ever gleaned from Candy happens to be the name "HMB" instead of "Control Journal" as mine was previously titled. I don't hate Candy because she has lied about a few things. I don't hate you for it either, because surely you have lied to someone at some point. Likely, you have deceived your own wife at some point and surely she is much more important that the rest of us. I know for a fact that I've deceived my husband, my friends, myself on many occasions (and I wouldn't consider myself a liar by any means) and I'd hope those mistakes wouldn't overshadow the things of value that I do have to offer to others. Yes, I read Candy's blog - so do you and half the other people that frequent here. What does that matter? I've not been verbally bashing of her site or yours - is that a problem? I've yet to sing her praises either. Have you noticed that? I am not a staunch defender of Candy or Erik Brauer and surely you can find several comments by me that are anything but glorifying towards them. The recurring statements about me being a follower, a supporter or anything of the like are tiresome and without merit.
MMM is right, I am the one that was defending Candy. It was me, I admit it was me. Want to borrow my glasses brushetta so you can read it better?
No, I see perfectly clear. MMM always turns what someone says negatively about Candy to "it is possible" or something else stupid like that. I find it funny, Ginger, that you are telling me to get glasses. Did you ever see the inventor's hall of fame page more clearly?!
Ginger:
http://www.invent.org/hall_of_fame/1_1_search.asp (I think the link has been posted previously) You can search by induction date. It took me a few minutes, but I looked at every year, and did not find Erik listed in any year. So, he has not been inducted since 1973.
Nope, I can see clearly. I have an email out to them at this very moment. I was talking about you reading what MMM has written. Clearly you are not reading right. Or you are only seeing what you want to see when MMM posts. You have been taking MMM's words and turning them around to fit your sadistic thought process.
You have to email them because you can not clearly see that Erik IS NOT on the Inductee's page? Are you still holding out hope that your precious Candy isn't a liar and a fake?
I emailed to find out if ALL of the inventors are on that page, or just the major inventions that were inducted that year, I also asked if they show the partners of the inventors as well. If you are going to drag a persons name through the mud like you want to do, you have to be able to do it with the real truth, not with a biased opinion of a person. If I receive an answer back, I will post it. I was told to check it all out so that is what I am doing. It is possible that his name is not listed because of a tiny invention that does not impact life. The ones I see on there, seem to have impacted our lives in one form or another. What was his supposed invention?
Candy is not precious, only Christ is.
Ginger, you answered your own question. If he WAS inducted into the inventors hall of fame.. then he had to have invented something that impacted peoples lives? Right? Then he would be in there? Right? He is NOT in there. At all. Yet, she says he was inducted into the inventors hall of fame. Well, why would you be inducted if you didn't invent something that impacted every day life? LOL
oh and you can see all the partners listed... you know if you started reading in depth.
I have no plans on reading in depth other then in the 90's. I just do not have the time. Maybe rachel, just maybe you have a point there:) I could have answered my own question.
Oh Brushetta,
"MMM always turns what someone says negatively about Candy to "it is possible" or something else stupid like that."
Do you know nothing about a fair and reasonable debate? I have challenged the probability or POSSIBILITY of things I have first hand knowledge of. Those things don't necessarily have a damn thing to do with Candy. Many times on this blog individuals have said, "NO ONE could... NO ONE does..." I have responded in kind with my PERSONAL knowledge of what myself or other people I KNOW can and do. You are foolishly trying to align my every word with a defense of Candy. How may ways, in how many languages and in how many of my posts must I say that if Candy wants to offer HER OWN defense should I declare my feelings that SHE should. I don't care if you all damn her to Hell. I do not care what Candy does today or any other day. I speak on things that I KNOW. You have only contributed ONE link, one earnest piece of evidence. Otherwise, your posts are simply to cheer on another or be critical of me. Grow up or back it up - or shut up!
Ginger,
There is a complete list. Go to the website (www.invent.org). Click on "Hall of Fame". Under the search box there is a "Complete List by Last Name Link" Click on it and look up Erik Brauer. He's not listed. This list goes back further than the year of 2000. I know so, because Alexander Graham Bell was inducted in 1974. The names of inventors are clickable.
This is the only solid proof that I have seen, but it is proof none-the-less. Perhaps her husband was nominated. I don't know. However, being nominated is not the same as being inducted.
If Bell was inducted in 1974, I don't think Erik Brauer was ever inducted. Bell invented the telephone and telegraph in the late 1870's yet he is inducted in the late 1970's. 100 years go by before one of the greatest inventors ever is inducted. Yet, we are supposed to believe that Erik Brauer, who is apparently in his 40's, not only invented something, he invented something worthwhile and commonly used that changed the way we live our lives, was inducted into the hall of fame in his lifetime?
Although I typically don't give a rat's you know what about the Brauer's exaggerations, you'd think that if they are going to make claims they'd make ones that can't be verified/refuted. It is beyond ridiculous (and need I say it, arrogant) to think people would believe something like that without checking it out?
The Internet has given them a forum for their diatribes, but I don't think they have any grasp of the full impact of the Internet on information. There is very little that can be tracked down, researched, verified or refuted right from our own homes.
20 yeas ago, making such a claim would have been much more difficult to disprove, since the average person wouldn't exactly have immediate, direct access to the information. Going to a stocked library, or contacting he hall of fame directly, would really be the only ways. And, who is going to go through that kind of trouble for the sake of some random person? I wouldn't.
But now, it took all of a few minutes to look up the information and refute the claims.
I am sometimes complete astounded by the ignorance of some people. Especially arrogant people.
Although I do usally find that the two character traits go hand in hand. Often, the most arrogant among us is the most ignorant. I think that is because people who are not ignorant know better! They use their brains and know how far fetched self praising can go.
As Walter Scott said: Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
There is very little that can be tracked down, researched, verified or refuted right from our own homes.
That should say:
There is very little that CAN'T be tracked down, researched, verified or refuted right from our own homes.
Tia,
I'd have to agree with your last post, about the ease of ability to research and verify almost anything. It is quite remarkable how easy it is to find almost anything or anyone - and a little frightening too.
I think it is only frightening if you have something to be frightened about. By that, I mean, if you have something to hide, or if you make enough of yourself public to make it easy to find you.
Me, I have little to nothing in the on line world that uses my real name or anything identifying about me. If I do a search of my real name in Google, the only hits that come up are from discussion boards about a new software application I was rolling out at work about 7 years ago.
There are, of course, ways for people who know personal information about me to track me down through paid services or whatever. I had a friend from high school who actually paid one of those background places to try to find me to get back in touch with me. Ultimately, though, she found an old email address and old communications using my maiden name, again from business related sites. With that, she found a co worker who she actually contacted - that former coworker contacted me and told me who was looking for me. I emailed her, we communicated back and forth for a while, then it dropped off because we really had no more in common now than we did 23 years ago. I was astounded at what she went through just to find me. We were very close in the early years of high school, but by our final year we had little to nothing in common anymore and drifted apart even before graduation. She was determined. But, one has to be to find someone who doesn't want to be found.
It's not as dangerous as some people think to be on line, and identify yourself. Instances of frightening, incorrect use of personal information aren't nearly as numerous as we are frightened into believing. I's probably just as safe and/or dangerous as using a credit card in a public place with someone looking over your shoulder.
Meaning, if someone is going to go to great lengths to do you harm - or, in my case find you to try to rekindle an old friendship - they're going to do it anyway. Most people won't bother, you know?
I got into the habit of not using my real name very early in the age of the Internet, back in 1992 when we first had access to it at work. Our employer required the use of "handles" as identifiers, just like early Prodigy, listserv, and AOL users. Until about early 1996, I only ever used the Internet at, and for, work, so I used the same handle for everything so I could keep myself straight. When I started with personal use, I continued the use of the handle, again, in order to keep myself straight. I hate having names/id's/passwords that are all different for different places. I worked in IT and knew the mass confusion that could cause, and it often caused me great headaches as I was in end user support and had to fix things like that for people all the time.
Anyway, that was a lot to say that as far as personal safety, I don't think it is any more of an issue than any other aspect of life.
As far as information, however, it has done wonders - or not. Employers can now go to the state corrections website and do a search on a potential employees name and get every public record related to them. Speeding tickets, tax delinquicies, drunk driving, disturbing the peace, bankruptcy - the lists are endless. That didn't used to be easy to do and employers didn't. Now, with the way job searching is, you can just as easily be turned down for a job because you are unreliable, in their opinion, for having had several speeding tickets in a short amount of time as you are to be turned down for not being qualified.
The information age, like every other "age" (Industrial, etc) has its good and bad. Use it wisely and there shouldn't be problems.
Ginger thank you for returning, things were starting to get a little dull. First of all I think others have done a fine job in retorting the hall of fame stuff. Secondly you know you are coming off as a mini Butler or jumping in like a monkey sitting on Mrs. Butler's shoulder. You may want to wait a couple of comments before chiming in. I am not sure why people wasted time in answering or retorting your comments. You do not care about the truth when it comes to Candy, and that is okay, fine, and tolerable for some reason.
Now to the point of being scared by the Internet. If you have a blog about yourself then you open yourself up to scrutiny. If you publish the address of someone that does not agree with you it opens you up to retaliation. I have nothing to fear what so ever. You can have my address, know my email, and whatever other personal information you want. I am not worried about any type of retaliation due to me being a grown up.
I don't think anyone damns Candy to hell, that is Candy's job. I don't think we are one in the same, and thus take some offense to the comparison. We do not hold ourselves up on a pedestal and talk about how holy we are. Huge difference.
I'm not personally scared of the internet or I wouldn't have a blog like I do. I just think it can be a bit frightening how easily people can get information about others. I am careful IRL as well, when I use my debit card and what not.
I'm not sure how to take the "mini-butler" comment - did you mean that in a bad way? I'm altogether quite ordinary and you might even find me pleasant if you met me :) But, then again, maybe not. I'm probably not nearly as freakish as you might think I am, being a homeschooling, Christian, mostly-skirt wearing woman.
Not scared of the internet either, or else I would not have the blog I have. I am an open book. Always have been since I started going online in the mid 90's. I have a visible life on the internet. I do not use my "real" name though but a form of it. I liked MMM's 2nd paragraph. She basically wrote my own thoughts so I will leave it at that. Only I wear only dresses/skirts and I cover my head.
CIC,
Could I just have your first name so I can address you by it? If you really aren't comfortable with that I undestand - I just like proper names when I have the option.
Kaira
CIC,
Where we may disagree on many things, you are right on about how much we should love our children and show them daily. I love my children dearly and they know that. And, when I am wrong I ask them for forgiveness for my failures. Parenting is just simply tough stuff sometimes. We'll never all agree on how it should be done.
matthew
Thanks Matthew,
You probably know that I have a Matthew, I love that name. We usually call him Mattie. As a grown man, is that scarring in any way?
Post a Comment