When I was in elementary school, a teacher told us about the near extinction of the Buffalo. She told us that they were killed for their tongues. She explained how the hunters cut out the Buffalo tongues, packed them in salt, and shipped them to the Northeast where they were a delicacy. Today I know that the United States Government paid hunters to slaughter the Buffalo as a means to exterminate the Native American Indians. Teachers expect honesty from their students, and should not lie to them, simply because they have a degree in education.
Look deeper - who are in the northeast? Wealthy capitalists. The logical conclusion (to our young minds) was the wealthy killed the buffalo for a little tasty treat, and destroyed the poor, subjugated natives for a snack. And takes away the guilt from the expansionist government. And as kids, we bought this hook, line, and sinker, because they were "adults" and "teachers" and we were taught to look up to them...
It looks like a prelude to confiscation or restrictive ownership to me. Only those the state deems worthy of ownership (cronies and fellow travelers) can have them. Let them have an inch and....
It's nothing more than the eventual reality of liberalism in our society manifesting before our eyes in our time. It had to lead to this “do as I say and we will take care of you” and “we know best for you” routine. Anyone that could not see things like this coming years ago and continued to vote in liberal politicians and policies has no one to blame but themselves. It was as inevitable as the fall of Rome when they embraced the Rule of Oligarchy.
well, you gotta train ´em when their young and influential. Thank goodness most at that age still do their own thing, all things considered. I mean, look at the "Just Say No" programs for instance. How many kids from the eighties smoke pot, or worse; do coke, meth, heroin, base, crack, etc? And not to mention the legal drugs such as psychofarmaceutical ones and yes, you guessed it, booze. I had a history teacher in the 12th grade that said to us "guns must be in the hands of the people too, otherwise civilians would be doomed under a ´dog´ regime".
After reading through history and living in the world for 36 years, I have to agree with him. Sadly maybe, but oh so true. Guns exist, so it´s better to have one too than to confront one bare handed. And with crime going up and justice being more and more leaniant to criminals, having lots of hot lead is not a bad option at all. All the best if none know about this, especially the government, the cops and the military.
So it needs to be re-written to accurately reflect the second amendment and to note how the founders saw into the future to predict how despotic regimens such as the National Socialist in Germany in the 30's and the various Communists during the 20th Century would outlaw guns before taking over the country.
Hauling freight out of Illinois one day the gentleman who loaded us looked at me and said you cannot wear that on your hip and why do you carry anyway. I told him to protect your damn freight. He had nothing else to say. The next time we arrived to load there he was ecstatic about the possibility of Illinois repealing their Gun ban. I still wore it in and had it on when I left. The point of this is did John Galt get fed up with those who like to hurt the sheeple? Want to vote on it?
The 2nd amendment, heck the entire Bill of Rights is something that parents should instruct their children on themselves. There is no way that anyone should accept someone else's interpretation of their most basic rights. Of course society as a whole will also interpret the meaning of these rights but one must have their own understanding so that they can know when someone or some governmental entity is warping the meaning of these rights.
Problem is, how many parents will spend TIME with their kids and teach them anything,from Basic American Politics to Throwing a baseball (or frisbee or football) with them to how to relate with other people...
...rather than take the lazy way out, stay at the office or at the bar afterwards, or dash off to the girlfriends because home life is "such a bummer", or crawl into their own shell, immersed in their own thoughts, rather than engage those who look to them for guidance.
First, one has to get the parents out of their self-centered and destructive shell, and get engaged with their kids as something PRECIOUS, rather than a burden... yet...
How do you do that, when it's considered impolite or offensive to even *talk* to someone else? We've had the real and the responsible taught right out of *us* by the same institutions poisoning our kids and grandkids... so only by rejecting the antisocial behavior we were taught (or more accurately, brainwashed into) can we start once again to be normal, rational human beings, and engage our kids enough to teach them right from wrong, rather than shirk that responsibility to a bunch of socialy engineered professional indoctrinators.
While I agree with you. I can say that I spend time with my daughter who still lives at home EVERYDAY. She is 14 and sometimes wants me to leave her alone but that is not her choice.
My wife and I are there no matter what. Normally spending 8 or more hours each day of the weekends and at least a couple hours each week night sitting right beside her helping her with her business. Not many 14 year olds have a successful business but hers has allowed her to travel to over a dozen countries over the last 3 summers and she will go to 3 more this summer.
Check out People to People. That's the program that she travels with.
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex EXCEPT THAT THEY PASS A LITERACY TEST.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
Isn't that how that section of the Constitution goes?
We are past literacy tests and other 'reasonable" solutions that actually disenfranchise minorities of various sorts.
So when are we going to mature regarding THIS part of the Constitution?
Far from a perfect analogy - but a thought to sponsor more thought.
So schools come under fire for not teaching relevant topics like how to do your taxes or balance a checkbook. When they DO try to be relevant by teaching how to apply for an unpopular license, they....come under fire. Damned if you do, damned if you don't much?
Whether or not you agree with the need for gun registration, the fact that a teacher is teaching actual relevant civics should be encouraged. They also should be teaching how to register for the draft, how to register to vote, a whole pile of things the students will be expected to do at 18, regardless of whether the things themselves are ethical (Draft Registration, I'm looking at you...). In fact, if I were in this district, that is precisely what I'd be asking: "cool, so when's the voter registration unit then?"
@g4lt The lesson isn't showing "here are the steps to register a gun". It's saying the 2nd Amendment requires gun registration, which is technically incorrect.
It appears to me they're trying to spoon-feed the kids the Amendments in a way they can understand. Maybe they didn't do the best job putting it in kid-friendly terms, but I don't see it as a political bias. The kids will have plenty of time to work out what "a well-regulated militia" is when they get a few years older. The lesson says the founders didn't want gov't to take away the guns, and I think that gives the kids a decent understanding on a 12-y/o level.
Agreeing (or not) about gun registration is NOT the issue. Registration is NOT mentioned in the Ammendment FOR A REASON. (Shall not be infringed much?) This is fabricated, biased crap and it's being spoon fed to young minds, and barely anyone whimpered. WAKE UP!
Okay, now we know what it's like in your fantasy world. The problem is we live in reality, and until the gun registration is overturned as it properly should be, the kids have a reasonable expectation of needing to fill in a gun registration form. I'd rather they did it competently, with full knowledge of what happens with the information and if the information's not there or false. Remember, reality is what happens to us when we're not dreaming, so perhaps you're telling the wrong person to wake up.
Have you lost your mind? The constitution, which is what the school lesson is about, says nothing about registration. If they want to include a lesson on the law of their state then fine. There is nothing stopping them from doing that. However, lying about the contents of the constitution is not some grandiose civics lesson. It's just a lie. Nothing more.
Ah, so there's only one way to teach children now? A common core, if you will? Lessons must strictly be about one topic, no hiding other concepts in there as well? God forbid that a child learns in a different way and would therefore be left behind then, right?
Dude. Seriously? You think it is ok that they are outright teaching that the constitution says something it does not say in any way shape or form? I am very glad you are not the one educating my child.
What gun registration? And who in there right mind would do it? Teach them NOT to. Teach them the REAL Constitution and what means. I'm not the one in dream land.
You'd also best teach them how to raise bail and hire an attorney then... Civil Disobedience is not for amateurs, nor should kids be placed in a civilly disobedient position until they can KNOWINGLY evaluate the consequences of the stand and accept them. The statists are the ones that need unknowing masses, we need smart individualists that can take principled stands knowing full well what the costs may be.
You never covered the age of consent for civil disobedience part. These are KIDS FFS. They shouldn't have to ruin their lives because YOU disagree with a law. Let them learn how to comply with it and decide if they wish to break it when they're old enough to make an informed decision. If you want more immediate direct action, feel free to not register your own guns: I have VERY little sympathy for direct action cheerleaders anyways, and would particularly love watching one have to eat their own dogfood for a change instead of sending others to do the dirty work.
Agreed. If you're going to be forced to live under immoral rules they may as well teach you what those rules are. The back lash is younger minds will acclimatize to the idea and consider it normal fueling the cycle.
Yeah, Stockholming is clearly a danger here, but it's a lesser danger than the danger ignorance nets you. I take it as axiomatic that no matter how disgusting the information is, you're always the better person for having learned it.
I disagree that Stockholming is the lesser danger. I understand it could cause serious problems in the future if the kids aren't educated on the laws, but when they are adults they will be far more capable of seeking out these laws and determining their morality. If they grow up knowing no other way but the law, it is a much harder battle to try and free their mind.
Simplified: not learning the laws puts you at risk of incarceration or possibly death, learning the laws puts you at risk for a life of slavery. You can call whichever one you'd like the more dangerous of the two, I prefer to have liberty or death.
But I'm in complete agreement with your second statement. You can't accept reality without knowing what reality is. I just fear younger minds won't be able to discern the value of the information.
You have to remember that Common Core is funded by Progressives like Bill Gates and George Soros. They fund it and their foundations wrote it, so the curriculum has to meet their requirements. Then the Progressive administration and the Department of Education under Mr. Duncan approved it and fostered it as good.
The "teacher" that wrote it, and the other one who used it, obviously have an agenda, not to mention the school board that approved it for instruction. If I were there I'd start a recall of their board... except the masses, already brainwashed into horsepucky like this, would never waver from their programming to support their masters... Grrr!!!
This... skewing of our country's direction; others stealing, through subversion and poisoning our childrens minds,our rights amd liberties: this assault on our constitution and as such, our nation... This assault, by enemies foreign and/or domestic... this must END!
1) Have one (or more)
2) Know how to use it (or them)
After reading through history and living in the world for 36 years, I have to agree with him. Sadly maybe, but oh so true. Guns exist, so it´s better to have one too than to confront one bare handed. And with crime going up and justice being more and more leaniant to criminals, having lots of hot lead is not a bad option at all. All the best if none know about this, especially the government, the cops and the military.
...rather than take the lazy way out, stay at the office or at the bar afterwards, or dash off to the girlfriends because home life is "such a bummer", or crawl into their own shell, immersed in their own thoughts, rather than engage those who look to them for guidance.
First, one has to get the parents out of their self-centered and destructive shell, and get engaged with their kids as something PRECIOUS, rather than a burden... yet...
How do you do that, when it's considered impolite or offensive to even *talk* to someone else? We've had the real and the responsible taught right out of *us* by the same institutions poisoning our kids and grandkids... so only by rejecting the antisocial behavior we were taught (or more accurately, brainwashed into) can we start once again to be normal, rational human beings, and engage our kids enough to teach them right from wrong, rather than shirk that responsibility to a bunch of socialy engineered professional indoctrinators.
My wife and I are there no matter what. Normally spending 8 or more hours each day of the weekends and at least a couple hours each week night sitting right beside her helping her with her business. Not many 14 year olds have a successful business but hers has allowed her to travel to over a dozen countries over the last 3 summers and she will go to 3 more this summer.
Check out People to People. That's the program that she travels with.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
Isn't that how that section of the Constitution goes?
We are past literacy tests and other 'reasonable" solutions that actually disenfranchise minorities of various sorts.
So when are we going to mature regarding THIS part of the Constitution?
Far from a perfect analogy - but a thought to sponsor more thought.
Whether or not you agree with the need for gun registration, the fact that a teacher is teaching actual relevant civics should be encouraged. They also should be teaching how to register for the draft, how to register to vote, a whole pile of things the students will be expected to do at 18, regardless of whether the things themselves are ethical (Draft Registration, I'm looking at you...). In fact, if I were in this district, that is precisely what I'd be asking: "cool, so when's the voter registration unit then?"
The lesson isn't showing "here are the steps to register a gun". It's saying the 2nd Amendment requires gun registration, which is technically incorrect.
It appears to me they're trying to spoon-feed the kids the Amendments in a way they can understand. Maybe they didn't do the best job putting it in kid-friendly terms, but I don't see it as a political bias. The kids will have plenty of time to work out what "a well-regulated militia" is when they get a few years older. The lesson says the founders didn't want gov't to take away the guns, and I think that gives the kids a decent understanding on a 12-y/o level.
Simplified: not learning the laws puts you at risk of incarceration or possibly death, learning the laws puts you at risk for a life of slavery. You can call whichever one you'd like the more dangerous of the two, I prefer to have liberty or death.
But I'm in complete agreement with your second statement. You can't accept reality without knowing what reality is. I just fear younger minds won't be able to discern the value of the information.