Are you kidding me?

  1. 4
    The bill says that the government agents, "well-trained and competent staff," would "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains ... modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices," and "skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development."


    http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111...nid=t0:ih:5197


    Are you kidding me?!

    With whose parental principles and values? Their own? Certain experts'? From what field and theory of childhood development? As if there are one-size-fits-all parenting techniques! Do we really believe they would contextualize and personalize every form of parenting in their education, or would they merely universally indoctrinate with their own?

    Are we to assume the state's mediators would understand every parent's social or religious core values on parenting? Or would they teach some secular-progressive and religiously neutered version of parental values and wisdom? And if they were to consult and coach those who expect babies, would they ever decide circumstances to be not beneficial for the children and encourage abortions?

    One government rebuttal is that this program would be "voluntary." Is that right? Does that imply that this agency would just sit back passively until some parent needing parenting skills said, "I don't think I'll call my parents, priest or friends or read a plethora of books, but I'll go down to the local government offices"? To the contrary, the bill points to specific targeted groups and problems, on Page 840: The state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families."

    Are we further to conclude by those words that low-income families know less about parenting? Are middle- and upper-class parents really better parents? Less neglectful of their children? Less needful of parental help and training? Is this "prioritized" training not a biased, discriminatory and even prejudicial stereotype and generalization that has no place in federal government, law or practice?

    Bottom line: Is all this what you want or expect in a universal health care bill being rushed through Congress? Do you want government agents coming into your home and telling you how to parent your children? When did government health care turn into government child care?

    Government needs less of a role in running our children's lives and more of a role in supporting parents' decisions for their children. Children belong to their parents, not the government. And the parents ought to have the right -- and government support -- to parent them without the fed's mandates, education or intervention in our homes.

    How contrary is Obamacare's home intrusion and indoctrination family services, in which state agents prioritize houses to enter and enforce their universal values and principles upon the hearts and minds of families across America?

    Government's real motives and rationale are quite simple, though rarely, if ever, stated. If one wants to control the future ebbs and flows of a country, one must have command over future generations. That is done by seizing parental and educational power, legislating preferred educational methods and materials, and limiting private educational options.

    It is so simple that any socialist can understand it. As Josef Stalin once stated, "Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed."
    K98, Sensoria17, iteachob, and 1 other like this.
  2. Get our hottest nursing topics delivered to your inbox.

  3. 25 Comments so far...

  4. 2
    Absolutely, ozoneranger. This is just one aspect of HR3200 that I cannot trust. This bill is full of social engineering.
    K98 and ozoneranger like this.
  5. 1
    Quote from ozoneranger
    The bill says that the government agents, "well-trained and competent staff," would "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains ... modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices," and "skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development."


    http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111...nid=t0:ih:5197


    Are you kidding me?!

    With whose parental principles and values? Their own? Certain experts'? From what field and theory of childhood development? As if there are one-size-fits-all parenting techniques! Do we really believe they would contextualize and personalize every form of parenting in their education, or would they merely universally indoctrinate with their own?

    It is so simple that any socialist can understand it. As Josef Stalin once stated, "Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed."

    You missed this one....

    "Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. " - Vladimir Lenin
    ozoneranger likes this.
  6. 2
    Additional discussion of this on this thread:

    http://allnurses-central.com/world-n...ch-415049.html

    Edited to add: I've already expressed my opinion of this on the other thread ... won't waste your time repeating it here.

    That being said, I have to say that this careless labeling of something you don't agree with is both inaccurate and very sloppy thinking.

    What radio show did all this krepp come from?
    Last edit by heron on Aug 14, '09
    GCTMT and HM2VikingRN like this.
  7. 1

    "Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. " - Vladimir Lenin

    Something very similar was said by St. Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuits, a few hundred years before Lenin thought of it.

    It's pretty common knowledge that the bulk of a child's character and learning ability are formed in the first seven years of life. The fact that Lenin knew it says nothing about the current proposal under discussion.
    Last edit by heron on Aug 14, '09 : Reason: de-snarking
    GCTMT likes this.
  8. 1
    Quote from heron
    What radio show did all this krepp come from?
    My info does not come from talk radio. Prior to nursing school I spent 20 years doing engineering research ( I have a BS in engineering) Amongst my friends I've earned the nickname "Webster" for my ability to find information. I do a very good job at finding my own answers and forming opinions. It seems the left is following the ways of past leaders in an effort to squelch opposition...

    "The art of leadership... consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention." - Adolf Hitler


    Looks like the leaders of the left have decided to use a certain radio format to be that single adversary...I only say that because whenever there is opinion that is contradictory to the current administration, the response is always to attack talk radio as being the enemy. My opinions are no better or worse than someone elses, they are just my opinions.

    But don't forget, it was also Loyola that stated “We should always be disposed to believe that that which appears white is really black, if the hierarchy of the Church so decides." Which Lenin regurgitated may years later as "A lie told often enough becomes the truth."
    Sensoria17 likes this.
  9. 2
    It's just that we're seeing the same old stuff, almost word for word, over and over, right down to the comparisons with lenin and socialism that make no sense.

    Still haven't read an argument against the provision that holds water, especially on a site that repeatedly decries the lack of parenting skills on the part of whatever social group happens to be the scapegoat du jour.
    HM2VikingRN and UKRNinUSA like this.
  10. 0
    I thought I'd provided links to the bill, as well as the rebuttal. When I discovered I'd omitted the links, I couldn't find a way to edit my post.

    Here is a link to the bill
    http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111...nid=t0:ih:5197

    And the rubuttal
    http://townhall.com/columnists/Chuck...&comments=true

    And my opinion (last time I checked we were still allowed to express our opinions, tho that may not last long)

    Page 840: The state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families."

    If you don't find this bit of social interference insulting, maybe the government NEEDS to raise your kids.
  11. 2
    I see that the proposal provides grants to states for programs to provide knowledge, modelling, activities and skills.

    This is socialist how? It's pretty much what public health nurses do every day.

    Remember, this is not a program that gives away funds, goods or services. It aims to provide skills and knowledge that a parent did not have an opportunity to aquire on his/her own.

    I agree that low income people don't have a corner on the bad parenting market, but they and, more importantly their children, do have much less access to education and support than people from more comfortable circumstances.

    BTW, your right to your opinion doesn't mean I have to agree with it. You still haven't explained how the fact that Lenin knew that early childhood education is important proves that the proposal under discussion is a bad idea.
    GCTMT and nicurn001 like this.
  12. 2
    Quote from heron
    I agree that low income people don't have a corner on the bad parenting market, but they and, more importantly their children, do have much less access to education and support than people from more comfortable circumstances.
    Well, I do have to agree with you on this one. I work urban EMS and see stuff every day that you just can't make up. Low income is certainly not an urban thing. I do think that the local school administration could have better used the $1 million dollars (Per field) it spent to put turf football fields at each of it's 5 high schools. My guess is that a parenting outreach program for young mothers would have been a better use of the money.

    Quote from heron
    BTW, your right to your opinion doesn't mean I have to agree with it. You still haven't explained how the fact that Lenin knew that early childhood education is important proves that the proposal under discussion is a bad idea.
    I'm fine that we agree to disagree. I'm not saying you opinion is wrong. Read this book when you have the time
    Stalin's Other War: Soviet Grand Strategy, 1939-1941 By Albert L. Weeks. I think you may find it interesting and you'll be able to draw your own conclusions.
    nicurn001 and heron like this.


Top