Religion and Education
This is a topic that I have been meaning to write about for a long time – that of having to learn Science and History in order to teach Science and History to my children.
One of the problems that I have with my religious upbringing is the complexity of the mis-information that I was exposed to in the church about science and history, even to the point of being told to ignore or devalue what was taught in school. It’s not so much what was taught; anything that is learned can be revised or corrected with further education; it was more the method – the implication that what is being taught is absolute truth because it comes from Divine Inspiration.
I can specifically remember hearing in sermons and discourses, and reading in publications by the church that address such topics as Darwin, evolution, age of the earth, Biblical ‘historical’ events – things that I believed that I had a complete education about. I grew up confident that thing things I learned about those subjects were both factual and superior to those published by professionals in those fields because we had Divine Guidance and they were ‘just’ scientists, historians, anthropologists, and other professionals in those fields, who, even with all their fancy education, lacked Divine Guidance to see the to the Truth of things.
This is a fallacy. I have suffered because of it, and were I less contentious parent, my children would have, also.
This reasoning, ‘we know because we have God’; is indicative of the arrogance that Christianity breeds, and it is this arrogance that I feel is utterly detrimental to the processes of education. The ideas that: God has chosen you and your religious counterparts to receive ’special’ knowledge; that your understanding of a subject is superior regardless of the current accepted factual understanding of research, physics or nature may say; that your education about such matters is complete because you have God on your side, essentially absolves the individual of the need to study, learn, seek, and to find out for themselves. It imbues them with a false sense of expertise on subjects that they are piteously ignorant of. Worse, it leads vastly under-educated individuals to perpetuate misinformation based on a woefully lacking basic understanding of historical events and the way the universe works. Detriment sets in when these same dreadfully under-educated children grow up with that false expertise and become the next generation of teachers and law-makers.
I use words like ‘woefully’, ‘piteously’ and ‘dreadfully’, because it is! I had literally had no idea how much I didn’t know until I started having to contemplate teaching my children. I was left without so much as a rudimentary understanding of what the theory of evolution is because of how badly Darwin’s work is misrepresented by my parents’ religion. It wasn’t until I started homeschooling that I realized exactly how misguided and even maliciously under-educated the churches want their subjects. If for nothing else, then the possibility that their ’have a building, obviously need a builder’ analogy is utterly irrelevant ; the possibility that evolution ‘might’ be true would, in effect, erase the need for a Creator. It’s not like God (in whatever form or concept you wish it) couldn’t exist for other reasons – but once you start exploring the possibility that life didn’t have, doesn’t need an intentional beginning… that opens the door to so may other questions that religion cannot answer.
One of the things I heard over and over as a child was that secondary education was, at the least, unnecessary and at the worst, actually harmful to God’s People. First of all, because we’re ‘living in the last days’, and so occupations like Doctor or Lawyer, which require many years of schooling that take away from the task assigned all True Christians, to ‘preach the Word’, would be irrelevant after Armageddon (or God’s Righteous Cleansing of the Earth of all Wickedness) because people will be perfectly healthy and sin-less (so no disease, death or injustice). Why waste all that time in school when you could be out there preaching?!
Secondly, beware! Exposure to too much thinking can ‘educate’ God right out of you! The more you’re exposed to other faiths (because mixing with ‘The World’ is bad), and philosophical ideas (which just confuse a good, God-Fearing mind), the farther away from being ‘sheep-like’, meek and mild one becomes. My answer to that was always, ‘Yeah… and? Sheep are stupid creatures. They’re not intelligent enough to save themselves even if the herd is leading them to their ultimate demise. Who in their right mind wants to emulate sheep?!’. But we’re supposed to be sheep, with Jesus as our Shepherd, following along, doing what we’re told.
I also grew up to eschew the concept of ’independent thinking’. After all, that’s what got us into this mess – Eve decided to think for herself and eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad instead of blindly following what God told her. If she had remained innocent and ignorant, then she wouldn’t have doomed mankind to sin and death. That idea/teaching has always bothered me, because without full disclosure, educated decision making is absent. Eve didn’t have full disclosure. She was asked to choose to remain ignorant or educate herself. And human nature, the desire we were CREATED with according to creationism, was her downfall. That smacks of being set up to fail. Oh, sure – arguments can be made that Eve was told what would happen, but how many of us have a baby who just has to touch the pretty flame before learning that it is, indeed hot, just as mommy has always warned? Do we doom the child to die for fulfilling the need to find that out for himself? Of course not.
As an adult, when I realized just how badly misinformed I was, it put me in the unique position of finding out for myself what the facts say. I am not an unintelligent person. I enjoy reading, research, writing, history – all fun things for me. Unfortunately, physics and biology and history are very, very complex subjects, with literally millions of years of information to wade through. So even though I have done my level best (and continue to) read and watch and listened to books, videos, and lectures, there does come a point where I have to defer to the experts. I choose to defer those who have devoted their lives to learning, understanding and teaching such things, and I gladly defer to their superior knowledge of their subject. After all, if they’ve devoted their lives to these fields of study, then they know infinitely more about them that I could learn as either an individual seeking to further my own education, or as a homeschool teacher. Deferring to their superior knowledge in no way absolves my responsibility to continue learning.
But at no point would/should/could I defer to religious amateurs who have absolutely no professional training in that field and claim ‘Divine Guidance’ for their take on things, and yet that’s what millions of people do on a daily basis – probably without even realizing it. Religious leaders generally have training from a seminary school, and if they have historical and/or scientific training, it comes from a theological viewpoint, which is to say, not unbiased. This is especially true in my parents’ religion, where the pinnacle of achievement is to devote your life to God’s Service, putting whatever skills you possess at the disposal of the church leaders. However, coupled with aforementioned aversion to secondary schooling, what you end up with is a bunch of ignorant, but sincere, people with zero educational or scientific expertise to lend to the validity of the religion’s claims on such matters. Claims which, with any depth of examination are easily discredited.
While I was writing this, I was searching for images, and came across this one called ‘A Matrix of Science and Religion by Colleen Scheck. It’s interesting to me; I don’t classify myself as an atheist; if anything I suppose I might be considered agnostic by some, though I purposefully do not claim any religious labels here.
I enjoy the ideas set forth by Humanist organizations, and enjoy learning about native and historical religions with their various deities and ceremonies… these enjoyments make me a hodge-podge of spiritual influences that I choose not to define. Suffice it to say that I am happy with my current state of spirituality and religious practice and it really shouldn’t mater to anyone else what I believe or how I express those beliefs, but I do find this image very interesting. I tend to fall somewhere in the ‘potentially co-existing’ area. I was raised in the opposite spectrum – that religion is set, and science is an ever-changing process (the oft-spoken ideal was that eventually science would ‘catch up’ to our religion), and therefore the two were in constant conflict. Concepts and events like: the age of the earth, the existence and time-frame of dinosaurs, whether or not the Exodus account is true, or the Great Flood happened as the Bible describes it; for individuals who accept the bible as a collection of stories that loosely ‘document’ one part of the world and culture of that time, there is plenty of room for modern science. But having the narrow-minded view that the bible is literal and factual on all counts – means that you must – MUST – at some point choose to blindly disregard things that can be proven.
Knowledge is always preferable to ignorance. Knowledge has the unique task of shaping reality. Things that you know to be true have a profound impact on how you live; on the decisions that you make; on how you spend your money or raise your children. I don’t want my children growing up believing something just because they ‘heard’ it, or ‘read’ it or ‘saw’ it. I want them to believe things because they heard it, AND read it, AND saw it. I want their information to come from various sources, with various agendas pushing that viewpoint. I want them to gather information and make informed decisions based on facts, not blindly follow. When facts from those various sources agree, then – and only then – can something be known. And even then, it may be subject to change as we learn more.
One of my favorite quotes is this, and I thought it would be a fitting close to this article:
“Knowledge is power. Power corrupts. Study hard; be Evil.”
~anonymous
Warmly,
~h
Educate the Children
All over Facebook recently, I’ve seen pictures with a topic, like ‘Stay at Home Mom‘ and ‘Home Birthing Parents‘, and ‘Doulas‘ with 6 pictures that reflect the different attitudes and perceptions of what the parents/people who subscribe to the beliefs of the topic are like. I looked around for one on homeschooling, but couldn’t find one, so I made one:
And I thought I’d write about how homeschooling (or homeschoolers) seem to be viewed by the outside world.
I think one of the main perceptions I get from local society is that I don’t fit in with their ideal of what a homeschooling mother ‘should’ look like. I don’t own a denim jumper, I only have 2 kids, and though I drive a mini-van, it’s just your average-sized grocery-getter (or chariot, as one of my friends lovingly describes the transportation of choice for busy families). That’s not true for all areas, of course, but here there are definitely more than a few denim-jumper/quiver-full families. If it’s not the denim dress uniform, then it’s khaki and twin-sets (the less-than-stylish around here call this brand of woman a ‘West End Wanda’); another group that belong not to. My standard uniform is a black tee-shirt, jeans and whichever shoes I feel like putting on (which can range from Doc Martens, to wedge heels, to flip flops, depending on the day’s activities), which puts me firmly in the ‘impostor’ – or worse, ‘secular’ – category, according to the homeschooling majority in my area.
Then you have homeschooling as portrayed in the media. Over and over, I’ve seen stories about how abusive homeschooling is, and/or that the only reason people homeschool is to indoctrinate their kids into religion. While I do know plenty of homeschoolers who do so for religious reasons, most don’t fall anywhere near that crazy tree. For most Christian homeschoolers, their goal is to raise their kids with their family’s values at the forefront, including the need and desire to be faithful ministers of their god. Though I disagree with that approach, I do understand it and think that it’s dishonest to link homeschooling – even if the primary goal is religious in nature – with abuse, neglect or other acts of parents who would find some other way to harm their kids if religion was taken out of the picture. Those people are mentally ill and that does not describe the vast majority of homeschooling parents.
Up next is the perception that teachers have of homeschoolers. This one also gets an unfair rap in my opinion. I think that this perception is perpetuated by children who, for whatever reason, go back into the classroom after homeschooling for a while. Many times, the child is classified as ‘behind’ when that’s only part of the picture. One of the main benefits of homeschooling is that you can tailor your child’s education to your individual child. In Texas, we’re not required to follow the school’s curriculum, so we have a lot of room to truly match what we’re teaching to where our child is at. We can also go about education in an entirely different manner (mastery-focused instead of covering X amount of material this week; or take history chronologically while the school starts with your family and branches out from there). We can use unconventional methods – from educational philosophy or theory to using non-standard materials or classroom environments. Since we don’t follow the same method and curriculum as classroom teachers, that means that there are areas where our child may be behind and there are usually also areas where our kids have a more well-rounded education than his classroom counterparts. But too often, it’s not the whole of education that shows, only the areas where your child is not ‘up to standards’ and thus, the myth continues.
After that, we come to how non-homeschooling people see homeschooling (not all of them, obviously – but some, certainly). I think that the perception (not necessarily of ‘me’, but of homeschooling parents in general) is that homeschooling parents see their kids as genius-level potential, and that with enough early learning and constant fact-drilling, it will be enough to bring that potential into reality. I know that I speak for plenty of homeschooling parents when I say that our kids don’t hold any more potential than yours, nor are they smarter than your kids. The difference is how we go about accessing that potential. Homeschooling, again, allows us to tailor every aspect of our child’s education to that child. Even if we have several children, we can adapt how or what they’re learning to address that specific child’s needs. If we have a child with ADHD, we can do spelling words or math while the child is on a trampoline or yoga ball. If we have a child who is a night owl, we can start our school hours later in the day (or even have school at night). If we have one child who prefers reading and another who is adept in math, we can cater to those strengths while taking the other subjects a little slower to ensure that the foundation is solid before moving on. Give any student that level of personal attention and you’re going to get better results.
Next, there’s my perception. Since the comic is not my own creation and yet I identify with it wholeheartedly, I dare say that other homeschooling mothers feel similarly at least part of the time. If the text is too small, it reads, ’5 minutes after Mindy died trying, Brice finally understood fractions‘. It seems like there are days, especially when we start something new, that I explain and explain and explain and yet still it seems like nothing gets through. We’ve been doing this for over 2 years now, and I can see the pattern… all the sudden, one day it clicks. There’s no rhyme or reason to it, but it’s happened over and over again. Then we start something new; rinse, repeat. As frustrating as it is to get the idea through my kids’ head that they’re learning something – they’re not experts yet and mistakes are okay; expected, even – the poor dears are blessed with enough aspects of my personality to ensure that failure is a big deal. They’d rather not do it at all than fail. But the other side of the coin is the gratification and exhilaration on their faces when they do finally get it and can do it like a pro.
Then there’s the reality of what it is that I, and homeschooling parents all over the world like me, actually do, and that is educate our children. We’re not experts, we’re not perfect. We have good days and bad, ups and downs and yes, there are days when we want to throw in the towel. It’s not about being superior or thinking we’re better or can do a better job than you; we don’t homeschool to judge you or your educational choices. In fact, we don’t care one bit what you do with your kids; we’re too busy doing stuff with our own kids.
The long and the short of it is that homeschooling parents come in a variety of packages, and no two are exactly similar. Now that I think about it, I’m may have a tee-shirt made that says ‘Homeschooler: Contents May Vary‘ to wear when we’re out and about. Like non-homeschooling parents, we do the things we think are best for our kids. Any contentious parent homeschools with genuine intent, and with their children’s best interests at the forefront of their lives. They’re not abusive, they’re not fanatics; they’re just regular people who feel like homeschooling is the best educational path for their kids. We’re not raising geniuses; we don’t think our kids are prodigies, but neither do we let them bum around all the time without seeing to their education. Our methods may look lackadaisical to you, but until you live in our home and see what we do, how we do it and what the results are, then we respectfully suggest that you keep your nose occupied elsewhere. We’re human; we get frustrated just like anyone would, but we’re also in a unique position of seeing our child’s mind expand on a daily basis – and taking pride on the role that we play in helping them learn.
Even with all our differences, homeschooling parents have one goal: educate the children.
Warmly,
~h
Photo credits:
homeschooling family: http://www.recycledpolyfurniture.com/about.php
religious indoctrination as child abuse: http://jesusmustbestopped.blogspot.com/2011/08/childhood-religious-indoctrination.html
kids playing video games: http://www.sheknows.com/parenting/articles/822769/are-your-kids-addicted-to-video-games
reading baby: http://ladyhazard.tumblr.com/post/372126132/aashawn-cristina-awesome-reading-baby-im
Mindy comic ( (c)Todd Wilson): http://extrememakeover-homeschooledition.blogspot.com/2011/07/year-two.html
Homeschool outside: http://thepioneerwoman.com/homeschooling/2011/03/how-long-will-you-homeschool-your-children/
Defining ‘Inclusive’ in Homeschool Groups
I wanted to talk a bit about the term ‘inclusive’. It’s a term that many homeschoolers hear often, but there doesn’t seem to be a unified understanding of what it means with regard to homeschooling groups.
By far, the most common use of the term ‘inclusive’ in homeschool group descriptions means that though the group is firmly XYZ (usually specifically Christian based, often fundamentalist), they allow other people to join. By ‘join’, they mean that you’re allowed to participate in their discussions and events, but you’re not allowed to rock the boat, idea-wise. This means that if you subscribe to a scientific age of the earth and the group as a whole purports a young earth ideology, then you don’t get to mention your disruptive beliefs. There is no respectful sharing of information, and no friendly debate allowed. You can come, but you don’t make waves.
The other use of ‘inclusive’ means that you’re allowed to join and have your own beliefs and ideas, and as long as you keep it to a respectful sharing of ideas and not wander off into evangelism land, you’re allowed and sometimes even encouraged to share them. You can be any religion or none, and be perfectly welcome. Often, these types of inclusive groups also define themselves as ‘secular’ as well (meaning that the group, itself, does not promote one religion over another; there is usually no ‘official’ mention of religion at all). This type of group generally welcomes respectful sharing of beliefs and ideas, and even encourages questioning and friendly debate. It is assumed that you’re here to learn and share, and that your beliefs may or may not be in the minority and that’s okay.
It is only this second type of group that actually fit the definition of ’inclusive’. Their practices actually are inclusive; it’s not just that they allow you to be there, they welcome you and your ideas to the rich tapestry of the group. They understand and respect that you may have differing beliefs and don’t tread on your toes with unwelcome religious proselytizing or verbiage that clearly promotes one belief over another. Furthermore, even if the bulk of the group is one religion or lifestyle, they go out of their way to make sure that they’re not doing things that make others feel unwelcome.
Contrast that with the first type of group – they don’t mind if you’re there, but they don’t really want your unique flavor in their mix. I am not opposed to this type of group; I both understand and can appreciate the value in having a group of people available to you that share your beliefs or way of life. Everyone should have a safe place to go to in order to work out their thoughts; reinforce their ideas and help fit new information into the framework of their current foundation. But it’s misleading to advertise your group as ‘inclusive’ when your practice goes against the definitions of the word. Saying ‘open to all as long as you understand and agree that XYZ’ is not the same as ‘inclusive’, especially when you really mean ‘open to anyone who is not homosexual, Atheist, Pagan, Muslim, Jewish or any other religion/sexual orientation/ way of life that we disapprove of’.
Dictionary.com defines ‘inclusive’ as that includes; enclosing; embracing. Thesaurus.com offers across-the-board, all the options, all together, all-around, comprehensive, full, global, whole, without exception as synonyms. As a homeschooling parent, I like the idea of those concepts for my children. I think that it is my job as my kids grow to continually expose them to ideas and thoughts and beliefs that make them think. As a parent and teacher, I am here as a sounding board, to listen to them and help them work through the things they hear and see and learn and help them clarify what they think about it; not to impose my thoughts and beliefs onto them. They have my example, and should they choose to follow, that’s great. If not, then I trust that I have raised intelligent people who are capable of reasoning out for themselves what fits into their life best. Considering the fact that I continue to learn and grow and see my ideas shaped by what I learn with each passing year, it’s ridiculous to think that I would be able to simply ‘tell’ my kids what to believe and have them just merrily go along with it.
I enjoy being part of an inclusive group because it gives my children that opportunity to get to know people of other religions. It exposes them to differing world views and ways of life, and the opportunity to ask questions and in general see that we’re all really not that much different. I think that part of my responsibility as a homeschooling parent is to make sure that my children are exposed to a diverse group of people. How can they learn what they think about things if their ideas are never challenged?
Surrounding yourself with like-minded people is not a bad thing. Surrounding yourself with like-minded people in an effort to avoid coming into contact with ideas and ideals that challenge yours IS a bad thing. Worse, offering a support group to your community in the guise of being helpful, all the while using that group to further a religious agenda or to attempt to squelch other ideas or convert non-conformists is tricksy and dishonest, and hardly conforms to the Christian ideals that many such groups claim to support.
If you’re so confident in your beliefs, then talking to someone who doesn’t share them shouldn’t affect your faith. There is no danger to me in talking to someone who is Christian because I don’t share their beliefs or faith. I have nothing to fear from them, or anything they say. In fact, I think that my beliefs are strengthened by interacting with people who don’t share my beliefs, and I also find that my beliefs are enhanced by understanding why they believe and think the way they do. There’s a beauty in not being so bound up by dogma and fear; getting to see and experience and share someone else’s beliefs is a joyous thing. Having an inclusive group, with a diverse membership makes this process easy, both for myself and my children. What a shame that most faith-based groups can’t say the same thing.
Warmly,
Chicken Mummy IV: Pharaoh Kirby I
After much procrastination, our chicken mummy project is FINALLY complete. What was supposed to have taken 6 weeks, with updates every week, has taken more like 5 months. I take full responsibility – between family issues and home improvement projects and other summertime fun, we’ve scarcely had time to breathe, much less plan an elaborate burial ritual for mummified poultry, and truthfully, this was far from ‘elaborate’, but at least it’s no longer in my kitchen, eh?
We slacked – we didn’t weigh him before burial so I don’t know exactly how much weight was lost in the process. He was 5lbs to begin with and significantly less than at burial, so the math lesson on this will have to come later. We also didn’t wrap his limbs individually; he was squished up in the container and so they were hard to pry away from his body so we wrapped him whole. We didn’t add prayer charms in the wrappings either – like I said, this was expedient, not elaborate.
I did learn a lot from this experience though, and I know the kids did as well. We’ve had several opportunities to revisit Ancient Egypt and put their knowledge to use, so I am quite satisfied with that part of it at least. We visited the Houston Museum of Natural Science last week and as always, the mummy in the basement is a must-see before we can exit the building. They had Jr. Scientists this time to talk about the mummification preparation process and the wrappings, and then a Museum Curator was there to talk to the kids about the actual mummy that is there (he’s a commoner, not royalty – we know this because of the way his arms were wrapped and placed, also, the priests did a poor/hasty job of removing his brain and some was left in his head). Interesting stuff!
Next time, I think we’ll use natron instead of plain salt, and will wash the body with vinegar instead of water before re-spicing. We’ll also need to figure out how to arrange the limbs so that they’re not so tight to the body. And finally, I’m thinking we may try a faster-then-6-week plan so that we can complete the project in a timely manner instead of getting distracted. Some of the faster ones were done within a week or so. I’d also like to explore more of the burial rituals, and incorporate more art into this lesson.
So without further adieu, here are the last of our chicken mummy pictures:
Lacking a pyramid, we opted for an underground tomb in our back yard for Pharaoh Kirby I’s final resting place.
They cleaned off the salt and spices. I was really expecting there to be a smell considering how long it’s been, but there was really none. All I could smell was the cinnamon and cloves. The skin was tight to the body – not 100% dried out, but pretty firm, and the flesh underneath was very firm.
With a prayer for a swift journey to the afterlife and a request for no haunting, we were done… finally!
Now… on to the next project. I’m thinking maybe a batik or tie-dye craft. Kidipede has some ideas.
Warmly,
~h
For my other Chicken Mummy posts, check here: Part I Part II Part III
Religion: Education vs. Indoctrination
If the topic of religion is a hot topic, then the topic of religion in schools may best be described as nuclear… which is kind of odd to me since it should be a non-topic, what with that whole pesky ‘separation of church and state’ thing that those darn Atheist Americans are so insistent upon.
Depending on which camp you’re in, there is either too much or not enough religion in the school system. Atheists constantly clamor for further reviews of curriculum and push for more science-based texts while creationists complain that atheists are infringing on their rights by saying that science should take precedence over the bible’s version of the beginning.
My interest in this particular topic comes in when you start differentiating between education about religion (more rightly termed ‘religious studies’) versus religious indoctrination – two very different concepts. Obviously as a homeschooling family, whether or not religion is in school is not relevant to my children at this time, but I am interested in the subject, and rightly so, because though we’re homeschooling now and plan to continue, plans have a bad habit of changing without notice. As a parent who values research and evidence-based information, this is a topic that I keep my eyes and ears on.
I’m addressing it here, in a homeschooling blog, because I think that a lot of people assume that all/most homeschoolers do so for religious reasons, or to secure a religiously themed academic program for their kids. That’s hardly true, but it is a widespread misconception. I think it’s relevant here because the difference between education/study and indoctrination is key and as secular homeschoolers, we’re not indoctrinating our kids into a religion, but we do think that the study of religions and their beliefs as an academic subject is extremely valuable.
‘Religious studies’ is commented on as follows at Wikipedia:
Religious studies is the academic field of multi-disciplinary, secular study of religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions. It describes, compares, interprets, and explains religion, emphasising systematic, historically based, and cross-cultural perspectives.
While theology attempts to understand the intentions of a supernatural force (such as deities), religious studies tries to study religious behavior and belief from outside any particular religious viewpoint. Religious studies draws upon multiple disciplines and their methodologies including anthropology, sociology, psychology, philosophy, and history of religion.
Religious indoctrination is defined and distinguished from education as:
the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned. As such it is used pejoratively, often in the context of political opinions,theology or religious dogma. Instruction in the basic principles of science, in particular, can not properly be called indoctrination, in the sense that the fundamental principles of science call for critical self-evaluation and skeptical scrutiny of one’s own ideas, a stance outside any doctrine. In practice, however, a certain level of non-rational indoctrination, usually seen as miseducative, is invariably present.
So, to recap, education requires critical thinking skills; to examine the information and evaluate it. Indoctrination discourages such practices.
Now, I know that there are some out there who would read that and dismiss it as a criticism of their religion. Years ago, I would have said that my religion actively encouraged its members to ‘seek out the truth’; to study and ask questions so that you can be sure of your faith. However, looking back now, I can clearly see that even though what was said from the platform was ‘ask and study and seek’, what was unspoken was definitely the opposite. People who asked too many questions were booted. The constant message from the platform was to be ‘sheep-like’, ‘meek’ and to follow the instructions of the church leaders. Your faith and dedication was called into question should you fail to fall in line with what was preached. It was made abundantly clear that you should not ask questions. The spoken message and the unspoken one were contradictory, and yet still allowed the members to ‘feel’ and ‘believe’ that they had the freedom to ask questions (make waves) without consequence. Because they felt that they were encouraged to study the claims presented as truth, they were less likely to do so, based on the false logic that ‘only those with the truth will invite criticism’. This example, to me, illustrates perfectly the difference between the two ideas.
Over the last few weeks as I was putting together this post, I’ve come across a few articles that deal with this subject. One is at EndHereditaryReligion.com. There are a couple of articles on children and indoctrination; Forcing Children into Faith is Ethically Objectionable asserts that indoctrinating children without their consent is an ethical violation, and Religions use Cult Indoctrination Techniques discusses the many insidious ways that religions go about indoctrinating their members,
especially children.
Religious Education is not Mindless Indoctrination asserts that there is value in having religious knowledge and the study of religion as a human phenomenon, and that the classroom is the logical place to get that information in the hands of small humans.
In short, there is more to teaching religion in school than mindless indoctrination. Religion can – and should – be taught as a sociological phenomenon – and one that is found in every human culture.
No doubt some of the practices that pass for religious education need to be examined. And no doubt some of the practices that pass for religious education in some of our state schools are questionable.
But that should not mean that these classes ought to be scrapped completely. If the education provided in these classes provides balance to different forms of religious expression, allows children to understand the practices of their peers and avoids indoctrinating children into a particular faith, then there should be no more harm in teaching children about religion than there is in teaching them philosophy or history.
I tend to feel like religious study is necessary. I think that as the world gets more inter-connected, having a deeper understanding and familiarity with other cultures and belief systems will go a long way towards peaceful interaction with other people and countries. I don’t think that in today’s world my kids can afford to grow up with a small-town mindset. Thinking globally is more than just a catch phrase, and I think that since so many cultures are indelibly stamped by their religious beliefs and practices, knowing about them can’t do anything but help. My conflict with this last article comes in with the assertion that the school should be doing the educating.
As a parent, and certainly as a homeschooling parent, I think it’s my job to educate my kids. This extends to religious studies as well – but I can definitely see the potential for some parents to withhold that information from their kids so that they’re properly indoctrinated into the parent’s religion. In such cases, then yes, having religious studies in school would help ensure that the children received at least a cursory introduction to other belief systems. I think that indoctrination goes the opposite way of understanding and respect for other cultures and people. How can you respect and value another person when you’re taught that they’ll be destroyed in fiery judgement because of their heathen beliefs?
In addition, I do think that indoctrination is an ethical violation. I understand the drive to share your faith with your children, but sharing is different from forcing them into it, and that’s what most parents are doing when they say ‘share’. I was raised in a religion where the indoctrination process is profound. It’s something that, like many religions who teach that their is the only way to salvation, is insidious and present in the very language of believers. Even now, I occasionally catch myself referring to the religion or the teachings using their terminology. I was baptized into my parent’s church at 16 – not because I believed the doctrine, but because it was expected of me. That was the next logical step. I was too old to coast along as a child anymore, yet too young to truly be aware of the consequences of what that commitment meant.
As an adult and non-practicing non/former member, any hope of my salvation within that religion is gone, because I have broken, irreparably, the vows I made as a child. Without ever having lived anywhere but in my believer-parents’ home, without ever being in any kind of situation to have my faith tested or even having access to information/education on other religions or cultures (beyond literature published on them BY the church), I chose a life-long commitment with only the indoctrination I received as a child. There’s no way that you can ethically be expected to make the kind of commitment that baptism or dedication requires when you’re not yet an adult. Even many adults don’t know what they’re getting themselves into when they make commitments; to expect a child to make and keep those kinds of vows is nine kinds of unethical.
We refuse to indoctrinate our kids. However, education is an entirely different matter. We want them to have a well-rounded and solid religious education – not to practice any one religion (unless they choose to and until they’re old enough to understand what that means), but to know about religions in general – the people, the cultures, the beliefs, the practices – and how those religions and their members have shaped history and modern science and education. I think that an academic knowledge of religion is necessary to understanding and relating to art and literature, and feel that there is a certain benefit in knowing what ‘you/they’ believe to further clarify what ‘I’ believe.
Since we’re raising our kids without religion, inevitably, there are questions asked and comments made. These are good questions, and often asked out of a sense of true concern. I can respect sincere requests for clarification, but once you take off the ‘god goggles’, it becomes obvious how ridiculous these questions/comments and others like them really are. Some of my favorites:
- Without God/The Bible/Religion, where do your morals come from?
Our morals come from the same place yours do – unless your position is that you really and honestly require a book to tell you what is right and what is wrong. I would imagine that if you lost your faith right this minute, you’d go the rest of your life without stomping on kittens and robbing banks. Wrong is still wrong and knowing those things come from inside… unless you’re a sociopath.
- You have to have a foundation in something. If not God, then what? (and other variations on the ‘you have to stand for something or you’ll fall for anything’ theme.)
- What about salvation? Aren’t you afraid for their futures?
Chicken Mummy III: Pharaoh Kirby I
Welcome to Week Three of our Chicken Mummy Project! If you’re new here, you can find previous posts here: Week I and Week II.
Originally, this was supposed to be a six-week long project, with us changing the salt and spice mixture each week and weighing our chicken. However, life for in the way during weeks 3 and 4, so Week Three is really Week Five. After we un-bagged Pharaoh Kirby and got him cleaned off though, he’s still pretty mushy, so we’re going to call it Week III and keep it up for a couple more weeks and see if he’ll go ahead and completely dry out.
On to the pictures!
Let me start out by saying that he’s definitely smellier this week. I don’t know if it is because we left him for longer than we should have or what, but there was some ripeness going on in that bag. I was thinking that he wasn’t slimy, but after we de-bagged, slime was indeed present. Fortunately for me, I was acting as photographer and the kids (in gloves) dealt with the body all on their own.
I was surprised at how much… mushiness was left. I really expected there to be more dried out, tough leathery skin texture, but honestly there wasn’t much change between week 2 and now. I am thinking that’s because we didn’t change the salt as necessary – we’ll have to compare for week 4 to be sure.
The boys enjoyed picking at the skin – lots of fat still visible underneath. They really got in there and examined the texture – I stayed well back from His Odoriferousness, but the boys didn’t seem to mind all that much.
We weighed him again. He started out at 5lbs. At Week Two, he was down by 1lb and he’s down again, to 3.2lbs this week. So the salt is working, just slower than I’d expected. I’m curious to try this again (maybe next year) with a different drying mixture to chart the differences.
They wrapped up by making giant soap bubbles in the kitchen. You can see the container that the body is in on the counter to the left of LBB. That’s how you know you’re a ‘real’ homeschooler, or so I am told – all the strange things that are on your counters or in your cabinets ‘becoming’.
Warmly,
~h
God’s Wrath and Natural Disasters: A Secular Perspective
I have heard many, many times over the last month or so (from various sources and in various disguises) that the earthquake, subsequent aftershocks and resulting tsunamis, massive loss of life and incredible destruction of many homes, businesses and otherwise complete devastation that is currently affecting Japan was ‘God’s Will’.
I’m going to stop for a moment so that you can re-read that paragraph. I want you to take off the God Goggles and really think about what that means. Go ahead; I’ll wait…
I am really curious as to what that means to Christians who profess such ideas. What does it mean to you that your god ‘willed’, either by direct action or inaction (allowed) such a catastrophic event to savage basically an entire country. I’m curious as to how you can write into law and agree that failure to act is a crime and worthy of punitive action, and yet hold your deity harmless in such times and under similar circumstances ‘because he is god’.
I cannot understand the willingness or desire to subscribe to a religion or mindset that advocates or requires paying homage or doing obeisance to a deity who shows such utter careless regard for His Creation. I cannot fathom why anyone would seek to justify these actions as the will and intent of an All-powerful and Loving Heavenly Father. Justifying it as ‘he is God; he can do what he wants to His Creation’ doesn’t fly for me; if my father caused the wholesale destruction of my family or sat back and allowed it to happen, he’d be hanged from the highest tree and flogged as the poster child for abusive or neglectful parenting. As creator or caretaker, we have the responsibility to take care of that which we bring into being. If you’re talking about a non-sentient item, and you choose to destroy it, that’s one thing, but we’re not talking about a bookcase here.
I am completely disinterested in indoctrinating my children into any belief system that encourages and supports the idea that those who are responsible for taking care of them are allowed to routinely, without warning, strike a death blow to them and all they know in the name of love. It’s not just Japan. China. Indonesia. Louisiana. Haiti. Australia. All of these places and more have recently endured catastrophic disasters that crippled their residents (believers and non-believers, the sane and the mentally divergent, criminal and law abiding citizen, those clean in the eyes of religious dictates and those tainted – all were equally affected) and economy. Entire regions have been permanently affected by these ‘acts of god’. I cannot see any way to explain such deliberately devastating acts to my children in the context of a ‘loving god’. There is no rhyme or reason for it (unless you buy into that ‘I’m going to punish you for things that happened years before your civilization was even formed!’ theory) and I am glad that I don’t have to try to fit this picture of deity into my children’s spiritual atmosphere.
So, you might be curious what we do tell them since we can’t/don’t/won’t fall back on the ‘acts of god’ thing. First of all, we’re not forced to explain this as a conscious act of someone. It’s just a terrible, terrible thing that happened, and we are free to be incredulous, sad, outraged, devastated and angry without having to try to temper that ‘because it’s God’s Will’. We can talk about our feelings and express our emotions over this tragedy, deal with them and move on into a helping space, rather than do mental gymnastics to try to fit this event into our image of what and who God is, or excuse it as ‘part of His plan’.
Due to our previous lessons about tectonic plates shifting, the kids know that the earthquake and aftereffects can be explained scientifically – and completely without action (or lack thereof) by an omnipotent being. Once we get past the ‘what’ and ‘how’, we move on to the bigger question of ‘why’… well, again, we’re free to explain such things within the context of science – where they have context and explanation that is rational and without either malicious intent or inactivity on the part of a deity.
Now, some of you will read that and say something to the effect of ‘worshiping science instead of god’. To that I say {raspberry}. One cannot worship science. One can accept that there is a reasonable cause and explanation for such events without relying on religious concepts to ‘explain’ away things we don’t understand. Indeed, I’d say that in today’s age of enlightenment, we’ve reached a point where we don’t have to rely on superstitious nonsense to explain the mechanics of the universe – we have enough knowledge and understanding of the way the universe is put together and how it comes apart that we know ‘why’ and ‘how’ things like this happen.
When my kids ask why this happened, it’s not because of some biblical prophecy that spouts gloom and doom and destruction for the many and salvation for the precious few. I think that the scope of the disaster is plenty wide enough without adding extra worry about the state of one’s soul (immortal or otherwise) and how one’s lifestyle fits into an archaic framework so loosely outlined that even members within its own factions cannot agree upon exactly how they should be exemplified. I am free to talk to my children about the tragedy of such events and focus on how we can help instead of using the time to focus on ‘furthering our ministry’.
If you’re looking for some crafty kid-friendly ways to get involved, here are some ideas:
Cranes for Kids – Osh Kosh B’gosh (Japan – through April 25, 2011)
YoungShelterBox (Japan and other disaster areas)
Plarn mats for the Homeless (local/community service)
Chemo Caps (local/community service)
Not crafty? Nothing to donate? You needn’t be talented or wealthy, or thinking globally to help those in need. Never under-estimate the power of walking down your street and offering to help out where you see something that can be done. Bring dinner or help tidy the yard of an elderly neighbor. Offer to run errands for a neighbor who is ill or unable to get around. Bring cookies and a board game and visit those who are just plain lonely – there’s always someone who would be happy for a cheerful guest and a helpful hand. Personally, I find more value in actions that are prompted solely by a genuine desire to help than in those prompted by an obligation to preach or a religious agenda.
Warmly,
~h
Chicken Mummy Week II: Pharaoh Kirby I
Note: This is a catch-up post; week 2 was actually about 3 weeks ago, and we haven’t changed the mixture out since then.
Week II: Dehydration
We’re waiting for PBJMom and the kids, and Fred to arrive so that we can drain, unpack, weigh and re-spice/salt Pharaoh Kirby I. Jana and her kiddos over at Homeschooling a Texas Tornado did their mummy a couple of weeks ago, and she posted their final product here. We’re using a different method; ours has spice and salt at every change. I think she only used the drying mixture (soda, salt and something else?) and spiced afterwards. I can say that in the spices added throughout the process definitely keep the smell down (if not altogether gone). We’ve had this thing on our kitchen counter and I can smell the cinnamon and cloves (if I stick my nose up to the bowl) but there is nothing that even faintly resembles the smell of what I would imagine decaying chicken to smell like. So spicing throughout gets my vote if your plan is to mummify indoors.
It’s been a funny experience, mummifying a chicken; made more-so by the fact that we had our friends over to start the process, and are now waiting on friends to arrive to continue… It’s not like that’s your average conversation. How would people react if you walked up and said, ”Hi, my name is ~h and for fun, my kids and I like to mummify dinner chickens — with friends!”
I guess that’s one of those, ‘you know you’re a homeschooler when…’ things. Weird.
So here’s our week 2 progress. There are notes on the pictures – if you put your cursor over the picture, the notes pop up.
I was REALLY surprised at how much liquid came out that first week. I’ve read about how the poultry industry injects water into hens to make them heavier (and thus can charge you more for the same chicken) and seeing this, I am inclined to believe that. I’m considering next year’s mummy and thinking we might try to get a farm-raised hen to try this experiment with and compare notes.
It was only after I was washing it off that I realized that washing a chicken that we’re dehydrating might have been a bad idea. Oh well… no harm done, I guess. It’s technically weeks later now and that doesn’t seem to have impacted the process at all.
We don’t have a small scale, so we weighed PeaGreen (67lbs.), then had him hold Pharaoh Kirby and weigh again (71lbs.). That’s a difference of 1 pound. Water weight? Maybe we’ll try some Midol or Pamprin in the bag next time and test their claims of helping to prevent bloating. o_O
And so concludes part 2 of this endeavor. Unfortunately, we’ve been kinda busy over the last few weeks and so weeks 3 and 4 sorta slid by without me realizing it. I have been checking on the bag though; there haven’t been many changes since we sealed him up at the end of week 2. I’ll update later this week with Week 5′s unmasking and re-packing. It’s almost finished!
If you missed it, Part I is here.
Warmly,
~h
Chicken Mummy Week I: Pharaoh Kirby I
After reading about a couple of other homeschooling families mummifying chickens during their study of Ancient Egypt, we decided that it sounded like fun (in an interesting, if kinda gory and icky sort of way). We put the call out to our homeschool group to see if anyone wanted to join us with their own chicken mummy, and SFK and her girls came out to play.
I found several versions of ‘how to’ make a mummified chicken; this one, Chicken Mummy, Recipe #3, was simple and easily accomplished. I bought about eight 32oz containers of plain salt, a couple of jars of cinnamon, some whole cloves and nutmeg. The recipe said any strong-smelling spices; I’d be interested in how other spices compare for keeping the smell down. We’re keeping the chicken in a sealed bowl on the kitchen counter (or in a cupboard when we have company. We’re not total heathens.) and there really is no smell that I am able to discern.
Week I: Pharaoh Kirby I has Died
SFK and I both bought a regular chicken – nothing fancy. Ours weighed 5.05lbs to begin with. I unwrapped it and washed it and we gave them to the kids to prepare. We also gave each team a glass jar to make canopic jars. I filled them with a super-saturated salt brine and the kids put the heart, liver and lungs in them (or would have – both chickens were suspiciously without hearts). We got an extra lung, and the girls got some weird bonus piece of artery or something. The consensus was that it was gross.
After that, they used paper towels to dry the body as well as they could. It took a surprising lot of paper towels – I’ve read that the poultry industry injects chickens with water to ‘help’ the weight; after seeing this project, I don’t doubt it! Every time we thought it was dry, they’d life a leg and there was another puddle of liquid. Eww. They did great though; they got under the wings and inside the body cavity – it was nice and dry!
Once it was dry, we have the kids a paper plate with about a cup of spices on it and let them rub the body with spices. I really thought that they would slide off, but the cinnamon powder stuck very well. It felt extremely weird to pick up the dried and powdered chicken body… really weird!
Once it was spiced well on the outside (even under the wings), we poured the rest of the spices inside the cavity, then they poured an entire 32oz container of salt into the body cavity.
Then we put the body into a large, heavy duty zip-top bag and poured another container of salt in, then sealed it up!
And that’s it! Look at those happy faces. Who knew dead chickens could cause that much glee in the 7-10 year old set?We’re checking on it daily (without opening the bag) and I’ll be posting updates as we go. I’ll update this post (and the rest) with the full series so that they’ll be easy to find.
If you’re making one, or have made one, please feel free to link to your blog in the comments!
Warmly,
~h
The CRC vs. Parental Rights
It seems that the Convention on the Rights of the Child(CRC) is back on the blog front again lately… With both Smrt Lernins posting about it and Homeschooling a Texas Tornado and a Pre-School Tag-A-Long, I thought I’d weigh in with my thoughts. This is not a new post; I’ve had it as a draft since July 2010 and just have never finished it. There are parts of the CRC that I agree with but I also think it is seriously flawed. Anything, once written in stone, can be manipulated and I see vast, gaping holes in the CRC, and definitely with various advocate’s interpretation of them. So here’s my previously unpublished post, updated in a few spots to allow for current insights:
While looking for picture for the ‘parents as experts‘ post, I came across this blog debating the CRC vs. Parental Rights. Now, keep in mind that the Parental Rights site/group seems to be made up primarily of right-wing Christian organizations and while I am decidedly not in agreement with everything that group espouses, I am interested in the debate.
My intent in writing the ‘parents as experts’ post was originally to promote parental confidence and empowerment in the face of friends/family/pediatricians/behavioral therapists who disagree or criticize your parenting style or methods (particularly if the naysayer is authoritarian or strong disciplinarian and you’ve chosen a route that is… not), but the issues raised by the CRC and the Opposition are interesting, and I believe that they deserve my attention (and resulting lengthy commentary).
Although there are many, many points that I’d like to address, the ones that stand out glaringly in such a way as to create the beginnings of a headache right behind my left eye are points number 1 & 3, which read:
1. A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed. Firstly, the frequently [sic] with which children seek government review of their parents’ decisions will likely be extremely rare. But that point aside, why is this wrong? If parents believe what they are doing is right, then why should they worry about it? Unless parents are being abusive, then this shouldn’t be a problem. And really, this boils down to parents rights vs. children’s rights.
My question is, how do you know that children calling for reviews of their parents’ decisions will be rare? I’m also curious if this blogger has any idea how introducing such a standard into practice could impact families. Even little decisions could be called into question – sure, that’s unlikely on a large-scale, but suppose someone makes a complaint about you to CPS. Upon investigation, it comes to light that your child ‘disagrees’ with many things that you, as a parent, have deemed to be right and good and in their best interests. That possibility is by no means uncommon, but with the weight of the CRC behind them, this could easily lead to long-term interference in your family’s dynamic.
‘Why is this wrong’, we’re asked? First of all, just because you, the parent, have research and professional opinions on your side does NOT mean that you’re going to be proven right or allowed to continue as you were when under investigation by ‘the authorities’. Remember that they always have their own professionals who have opinions which may very well conflict with yours. Child protective organizations nationwide have cases where normal parents – GOOD parents who simply do things differently than the mainstream – have had their decisions called into question, been put under investigation and had their children removed and traumatized because some overzealous social worker or opinionated old-school judge disagreed with the parent’s decisions.
As a parent, there are decisions to make every single day. Sometimes you’re going to do the best/right thing, sometimes you’re going to make a mistake – but few parents deliberately make bad decisions out of malice. On virtually every issue there are two sides to consider. Then you have to weigh the information against incoming advice from well-meaning friends and family, and take into consideration your own biases before coming to a decision. In many cases, even having clear-cut medical reasoning and sound scientific grounding on your side is not always enough to combat mainstream corporate America with its death grip on dictating what is normal and acceptable and therefore ‘best’. If you doubt that, start doing some research on any controversial parenting topic and you’ll see what I mean.
Giving a child the power to question a parent’s right to decide and make decisions for themselves is ludicrous. Children do not have the knowledge or life experience to make the kinds of decisions that parents have to make every day. Parents are responsible for shaping the whole person of their child – nurturing and molding an essentially self-centered being into a productive and functional member of society. Children do not possess the forethought to see how today’s actions impact tomorrow’s results and cannot possibly be expected to weigh the required information needed to make those kinds of decisions for themselves. That’s more than many parents are capable of, which is why policies like the CRC sound like a good idea to some - to save children from incompetent or under-educated parents. Why not address the actual ‘problem’ rather than tear down the structure of the family in an attempt to fix it?
3. The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision. Um, yeah. You know why? As flawed as governments are, as stupid and biased as politicians can be, then tend to be somewhat influenced by experts in the area of child development when it comes to this stuff. Parents on the other hand can vary. A lot. There’s no requirements to be a parent other than being able to reproduce. Some parents don’t have a clue. You need a license to drive a car or to fish, but there’s no “skill testing question” you need to pass in order to parent. Some people with kids are dumbasses. Sometimes it should be up to social workers and child psychologists to interfere when the parents are doing things that will harm the child. This is one of the best points in the document.
Um, actually… NO. And here’s why:
While I agree that in some cases it might be appropriate for a government or other authority to interfere for the benefit of the child, giving any ole government worker the authority to intervene simply because they don’t agree with the parent’s decision is playing with FIRE. In fact, there are already safeguards in place within the existing agencies to protect the safety of the child – pediatricians, hospital employees, teachers, school nurses all are obligated to report suspicion of abuse or neglect to the authorities who then investigate – and even the limited powers that those agencies can be and have been exploited because of a mere difference of opinion. The system is by no means perfect, and children do fall through the cracks, but as tragic as that is, the answer to this problem is not punishing or discriminating against parents as a class of society.
You have heard the adage about opinions, right? Even the most pedestrian governmental worker can have an opinion. They may think that they know best when in reality they have little or no experience with children or child-rearing and they certainly cannot style themselves as authorities on your particular child. Giving them the power to usurp parental authority without clear, documented and proven danger or harm to the child’s physical, emotional or educational being is wrong, wrong, wrong.
For example, take the decision not to vaccinate. That’s a touchy and highly controversial topic that most educated parents labor over. Even the experts are divided on the topic. The bottom line is that as the parent, that is MY decision to make. If my decision conflicts with the opinions of others – of doctors and scientists even, is it the wrong decision? There is ample evidence on either side of that equation, so who gets the final say on whether or not I am neglecting or harming my children by not vaccinating? I feel that vaccinations are toxic and that the risks associated with getting them overshadow the as yet unproven potential benefits of getting them. I have one child whom I believe to be negatively affected by the few vaccinations he did have, and I will FIGHT to ensure that his body is not further used as a guinea pig by the entities in government who are supposed to put his needs and best interests first but don’t.
I take issue with the statement, “As flawed as governments are, as stupid and biased as politicians can be, then tend to be somewhat influenced by experts in the area of child development when it comes to this stuff.” In a world where we’re constantly bombarded with news coverage about how studies on this medical topic or that public health issue are funded by big pharma, or how policies are enacted to prevent lawsuits, or how mothers are arrested for refusing to submit to invasive medical procedures because a judge disagrees with her decision… I think it is patently obvious that governments and their agents are more influenced by money and kickbacks than they are by The Facts(tm).
My decision not to vaccinate was not one that was made lightly, or on a whim. It was a carefully and painstakingly researched decision made after long hours of contemplation, studiously examining the material available and consulting with professionals who are able to debate rationally on the subject. Because this is such a highly controversial subject, my decision is one that I have had to defend to ‘authorities’ who disagree with me. At the end of the day, my base argument is that THIS IS MY CHILD. I GET TO MAKE THE DECISIONS REGARDING HIS CARE. PERIOD. That’s my ace in the hole when dealing with people in authority positions who have a differing opinion from mine. My point in this illustration is that even when you have experts on your side, that may not be enough. I daresay that I know more about the dangers and risks associated with vaccination than your average WIC or Medicaid employee. Yet as governmental authorities, would they have the power to override my decisions, despite my superior knowledge on the subject in general and personal history of my child? The CRC certainly puts that out there as a possibility.
I think one of my main objections to the CRC is that it sets the stage, even invites the government into the family. I don’t think that’s a place the gov’t has any right to be. Personal freedom is something that American treasure – it’s a basic right that we all believe we possess and are conditioned to fight for. The CRC seems to give the child ‘rights’ above and beyond basic HUMAN rights. I think human rights cover them plenty. The US has the largest scale abuse of the legal system in the world – the CRC puts avenues in place for children to legally question every move that their parents make – which ties up already overworked caseworkers and brings them into a situation where they have no business being. Children could be removed from homes when there is nothing more than a disagreement and the CRC only gives more weight to those kids of cases. We’ll end up spending millions in taxpayer money to handle these cases (because no child I know can afford a lawyer – yet one must be provided to see to the child’s interests in the debate). There are also the costs of foster care and the wages of the additional employees to oversee each and every complaint.
I see the CRC as setting the stage for pitting parents against children. We’re supposed to be promoting family unity, not declaring all out war on parents. It seems to me that a better use for all that money would be in founding public education programs and parenting support groups, and ensuring that the places that parents already go to seek information and support (like their doctors) are giving evidence/research-based and non-biased information. Take steps to ensure access to information and protection from advertising, like starting with comprehensive sex-education in schools and banning the distribution of formula samples on maternity wards at hospitals and kickbacks to doctors for medication promotions that pharmaceutical companies are using to taint the information pool.
As for the religious components… it is a parent’s responsibility to share their beliefs with their child – to direct and guide. Yes, some take that to the extreme, but again – unless there is abuse and the child can be moved to a safe environment, then the child WILL eventually grow up and have the opportunity to make different choices. You can’t dictate every aspect of the population’s life and as a country that was essentially founded on Christian piers, most of our citizens are deeply rooted in their faith and want to share that with their kids. Some religions go so far as to teach that their way is the only way to salvation. Some faiths DO teach – as tenets of their faith – that people of other religions will not share the same glorious future; some teach that people who do not share their faith will be destroyed in a holy war. That’s not hate, exactly, but that type of mindset doesn’t breed tolerance, acceptance or help one set of people peaceably coexist with another – and that can be counted under the CRC’s anti-hate policy… which comes very close to if not treading all over freedom of religion… which is one of the cornerstones of the United States. While I personally disagree with that kind of mindset and dogmatic religious thinking, I do respect the RIGHT of any American to believe as they choose. I don’t ally myself with any organized religion, but I do believe that parents should have the right to freedom of religion and belief, and to enforce that in their own households.
I will say that I vehemently disagree with the notion that opposing the CRC has anything to do with belief in ‘owning’ our children. I think that is a rather simplistic viewpoint that does not take into consideration the many, many ways in which the CRC’s points can be mishandled or used against parents. My opposition comes into play because of my deeply held sense of responsibility to do what is best for my children, especially when my decisions are questioned by authority figures. I think that the majority of parents feel duty and responsibility towards their children – obligation to them and in that, my fellow bloggers and I are in agreement – having children is a monumental responsibility that should not be undertaken lightly.
I don’t know any parents who had children to get something out of it. There is also a sense of interdependency in virtually all of the families I know – I have yet to sense a need for liberation of the child from the tyranny of parental authority among most families. The CRC seems to me to set parents up for attack and to foster the idea that parents exist only by the grace of authority and a warning to overstep those bounds at your own risk.
I think that very few people see children as chattel – comparing the state of children to women or black people or Chinese people in the past is inaccurate because grown women and African-Americans and the Chinese are fully functioning beings. Children would not survive without caregivers – without parents to set limits that children do not have the mental skills or life experience to see the benefit of. Women, slaves and oppressed peoples have never been less intelligent or less capable than their ‘keepers’, and though children may be intelligent, few would argue that children have the same level of common sense, experience and forethought/benefit of hindsight that adults have. The same holds true for such things as medical treatment – not elective procedures that can be put off until the child is an adult, but for life-saving treatment - you betcha that is both my right and responsibility to determine the best course of action for my child’s treatment. Neither ‘right’ nor ‘responsibility’ of that statement can be over-emphasized - they are equally important and both should be minded with the utmost care.
Regarding DaMomma’s post, her ‘Parent’s Bill of No-Rights’ was posted in regard to a TN proposal that would give virtually all divorced parents 50/50 custody of (and therefore ‘rights’ to) their child. I think that using that list in defense of the CRC is misleading – when parents divorce, there are many, many issues at play and often the competency of one parent or both is called into question. In that situation, you’re already inviting gov’t into your family. The CRC intrudes where no invitation was issued and interference is unwelcome.
That said, and thought I agree with many, I also disagree with some of DaMomma’s points; I absolutely believe that I am entitled to respect – both as a parent and as a PERSON. I would be a poor parent indeed if I did not teach my children to respect others – starting with the members of their own family. It goes hand-in-hand with the idea that respect is earned, not freely given; I teach best by modeling. I respect myself, I respect my husband, and I respect my kids. In turn, I expect – and rightfully so – respect from all of those people in return. Additionally, I absolutely have the right to see my own children. Unless I have done something to them that is in such disregard for their well-being so as to require the removal of my parental rights – I absolutely have the right to see and care for my own child. Divorcing parents may need to defend that right in the light of unjust attacks on their character by a vindictive ex-spouse, but most parents aren’t, and should not be, subject to that process. Setting up government in place to superseded that right is madness.
Again, I go back to thinking that money would be well-spent in social educational and support programs that are designed to provide unbiased information – all of the information, from all sides to review and implement according to their own philosophy. Parents who perpetuate the mistakes that previous generations have made do so not because they don’t love their children, but because they HONESTLY BELIEVE that it is the best or only way to properly raise their children. I am here to tell you that I have personally seen the difference that education and support can make in a mother’s mindset and world-view. Seeing a mother who had an elective c-section, circ’d her baby boy in the hospital and formula fed make completely opposite choices after being regularly exposed to mothers with different ways of doing things reinforces my belief that access to information and support is the key – not mandating laws which seem good on the surface but open doors to the destruction of the family as we know it. I don’t think that opposition to the CRC has anything to do with ‘child ownership’. I think opposing the CRC has everything to do with the autonomy of the family and living up to the many, heavy responsibilities that come along with those rights.
Warmly,
~h
Additional Resources:
http://childrightscampaign.org/documents/OppositiontotheCRC.pdf
http://homeschooling.suite101.com/article.cfm/legitimate-homeschool-socialization-concerns
My Beef with ‘CHRISTmas’
I know Christmas is over, but this has been bugging me and this is the first opportunity I’ve had to write about it, and since this is Thursday, and it’s been a while since I’ve done a Secular Thursday post, I figured it was a sign or something. {/snark}
Let me begin by saying that I have no problem with Christmas. But ‘CHRISTmas’, and it’s devotees, bug the crap out of me. Why? Because Christmas, and therefore ‘CHRISTmas’, although ‘adopted’ by the Christian church, have basically nothing to do with the actual birth of Christ (assuming that your mythology allows for his existence and significance). One need only look to the symbols of modern Christmas celebrations to see that virtually all of them are taken from ancient celebrations of the Winter Solstice, Yule and the Roman Saturnalia. I am not interested in getting into a debate about that point; I only mention it to illustrate the ludicrousness of the saying ‘putting Christ back into Christmas’ when it might be more appropriate to take Christ out of it all-together.
I think that for a lot of people, Christmas has taken on a more secular tone. Even among professed Christians, few people actually go to church or have any religious observance of the holiday. Mostly, it’s a time of family and togetherness, of celebrating and appreciating the people in our lives that make it worth living; at least that’s true for the majority of our friends.
Among devout Christians, even, most of the ones I know are content to assign whatever religious significance Christmas has to them within the context of their lives, and aside from the odd post on Facebook, allow others the celebrate at their own level of religious significance. They seem to get the difference between ‘sharing their beliefs’ and ‘shoving them down your throat’. Most even respect that some people are flat-out not Christian at all, and don’t take it as a personal attack when confronted with someone who celebrates (with just as much devotion) Hanukkah or Ashura or Kwanzaa or Festivus or Yule. This is true especially in my diverse circle of friends, and I appreciate that my friends respect each other and value differing world-views as much as I do.
So, it is with this thought that I leave you today, hoping that your holiday season has been full of love and wonder, that your family has been safe and warm, and that your friends are open-minded and accepting. Happy Holidays!
Warmly,
~h
Family Traditions
This past Saturday was the celebration of one of the few things that my side of the family celebrates – opening day of deer season. I was raised in a faith that did not allow the celebration of traditional holidays, so our family was pretty creative about finding other things to celebrate. Weddings and anniversaries were always big. Graduation parties and first/last day of school rated high on our list, too. My mom always put together some kind of summertime fun party for us too, but the one that we all sort of looked forward to was the first day of deer season – and Camp Breakfast.
The tradition is that all the men hunt and all the women cook. Being the somewhat progressive (and possibly very, very redneck) family that we are, a lot of the women hunt, too. My mom and grandmother (who do not hunt) and great-aunts (who do) usually cook. My sisters and I (who also do not hunt) are usually the pitchers-in of supplies, but this year I actually got to cook. Traditionally, it was bacon and eggs with deer sausage and biscuits or toast, but in the last few years, they’ve branched out into different recipes. This year, it was breakfast burritos, biscuits and gravy and muffins. No one leaves hungry!
(Yes, they had coke with breakfast… don’t judge; it was a special occasion). Afterwards, the kids spent the afternoon performing bike stunts with their cousins.
To go along with this ‘family holiday’, we’ve also completed a lapbook on deer. We also incorporated a couple of the mini books from the Yearling lapbook and may grab it at the library later on and do the lapbook for it as well. This is a small lapbook, but it was a very rich unit. When we were looking up predators, we ended up looking more deeply into the mythology that surrounds them (like wolves and Native American culture, and jaguars and South American culture). The art work and mythology is so interesting; I’m sure we’ll go back to those areas again.
We also got to talk about conservation and endangered animals and how it affects us when animals go extinct. We talked about how our state’s Parks and Wildlife department is reintroducing some of the larger predators to our area and the role they play in population control. I was honestly surprised by how much there was to be learned on such a seemingly simple topic. As for age-range, this lapbook was right on-target. My boys are 7 and 8, they really enjoyed working on this one. Gold Star to HomeschoolShare.com for putting together such a great book!
Warmly,
~h
Secular Nature Study
We’ve been outside nearly every day over the past 2 weeks, roaming our neighborhood, a local zoo and forest hiking trails. We spent yesterday at a local state park, down by (and in) the creek, wading, swimming, collecting algae and small shelled critters… the weather has been absolutely gorgeous and we haven’t wanted to miss a moment of it. Of course, enjoying nature inevitably brings up the issue of creation… and here we go with today’s Secular Thursday post!
Actually, I’m really not going to go into the creation debate… we’ve had too much fun over the last few days to worry overmuch about why some people can’t simply enjoy being here without delving into the depths of why and how we got here. Something about all that just makes me want to roll my eyes with a long-suffering sigh and make rude faces at my friends who then laugh uproariously as we make snarky remarks about the subject.
Last week, then the weather really started cooling off, I decided that I wanted to take the kids out to the creek and just lay on the bank and read while they played in the water. I mentioned my plans to my friends and at their piqued interest, I magnanimously agreed that they might enjoy such an outing as well and welcomed their company. So we ended up with 4 moms and 10 children, which if you’d seen the amount of ‘stuff’ required to go on this outing, you’ll quickly see the wisdom in bringing this many kids.
We moms brought our crafting books and drawing materials, as well as the kids swim wear and field trip, fishing and picnic supplies. Some of the kids brought bikes as well, so we were well-supplied for any and every eventuality.
Shortly after these pictures were taken, a ranger came out and let us know that we were in a ‘no swimming’ area, and that we’d have to move. The only issue with that was that the designated ‘day use’ areas are, in reality, small picnic tables in very small enclosures off the parking lot. You can’t even see the creek and there is nowhere for the kids to play. So we packed up with much grumbling and relocated to the pavilion. It was right on the playground and kiddie hiking trail, and near the creek (sorta), so we set up under the pavilion and let the kids roam wild.
All in all, it was a great day. The kids got plenty of learnin’ done without a single formal lesson in sight (more on that from the incomparable PB&JMom, whose commentary on the day makes me want to stand up and applaud and whistle and stuff) and we got some planning done for the next couple of months for the homeschool group. I’d say that’s a productive day!
Warmly,
~h
Secular Thursday, Defined
There’s a thread on SecularHomeschool.com that asks what makes you a secular homeschooler. Since I’ve been browsing the SecThurs blogs, I’ve also noticed a bit of a division between what one defines as ‘secular’ and the next. Apparently, there are many schools of thought on the subject.
For example, one person might define secular homechooling as completely a-religious. Another might use religious material but edit out the religious stuff, or be fine with a modicum of religious content but refraining from letting that be the focus. Some secular homeschoolers atheist or agnostic and others are Christian, but do not define themselves as “Christian Homeschoolers”. Still others are decidedly anti-Christian in bias and seem to get a little miffed when the Christian set use ‘secular’ to define themselves.
While I understand and can identify with many facets of the ‘secular’ arguments, I thought that rather than debating the seemingly endless possibilities and nuances that secular homeschoolers encompass with the term, I thought that I would define what ‘Secular Thursday’ means to me so that when you come to my blog looking for a SecThurs post, you’ll know what flavor of ‘secular homeschooling’ you’re getting into.
Though I think Smrt Mama left a pretty open discussion guideline for SecThurs, most of my SecThurs posts will have to do specifically with religion and how it relates to homeschooling in some way. I am not a particularly religious person though I was raised in a very conservative religion. My Loverly Husband and I do not attend church and we don’t allow our children to attend church either. We live in the ‘Bible Belt’ so the main religion we’re exposed to in our area is Conservative Christianity (CC). I am intrigued by the message of love and forgiveness that CC seems to preach and baffled at the many ways in which CC’s members cast judgement, belittle, criticize, ostracize and make utterly unwelcome anyone who makes it clear that they are unwilling to follow that line of belief. This attitude is especially apparent in the homeschooling community here as there are 7 Christian-based co-op/support groups in this area. To my knowledge, none of these groups even allows anyone who is not CC to become a member. They are not inclusive, they are not welcoming or tolerant of other faiths and the juxtaposition of message vs. works is quite perplexing to me… so I write about that a lot.
In our homeschooling, I do not seek out religious material and I rarely use anything with a religious slant unless the lesson we’re studying is on that particular religion. I don’t care for bible verses listed on everything, or opening messages that talk overmuch about faith or related subjects. While I am not ‘anti-religion’, I vastly prefer secular materials and prefer that science be the foundation for my children’s education rather than faith/belief. I do try to be respectful (mostly) in my portrayal of other religions, though when faced with outright non-Christ-like behavior from CC’s, I reserve the right to point and sneer mockingly while making snide remarks.
Overall, I think my blog carries a secular tone. The resources I recommend are overwhelmingly secular, though if I find something I like I won’t ‘not’ use it just because it’s got a bit of religious content. While I wouldn’t want CC’s to be uncomfortable reading here, they’re not my primary audience and as such I won’t censor my posts with that audience in mind. There isn’t a large secular homeschooling community though it is growing by leaps and bounds, and I cherish my little corner of the blogosphere where I can talk about things that interest me (and hopefully, you).
In conclusion, that’s what you can expect from my SecThurs posts – a great deal of rumination about the climate of homeschooling without religion in a very religious area, and a few posts on how we do things without a faith-based slant. If you’re a secular homeschooler and haven’t checked into writing with Smrt Lernin’s Secular Thursday bloggers, let this be your invitation. Click the icon below for more info.
Warmly,
~h
Religion Matters!
Something that’s come to my attention as a homeschooling mom that I didn’t notice as a ‘classroom mom’ is that religion matters. Not to me, but to the homeschooling community in general. It even matters to the people in your community as a whole since once they learn you’re homeschooling, they automatically assume that you’re one of the denim jumper moms (even though my blacker-than-thou’s teeshirt, ripped jeans and coordinating black nail polish do their best to discourage that assumption).
As a parent with kids in school-school, my religion never really entered the picture. I was raised in a faith where it was a big deal at the beginning of every year for my mom to sit down with the teacher and explain why I couldn’t participate in holidays and wasn’t going to be standing for or saying the pledge. Our church even had a special booklet that was designed just for teachers. Since I chose not to pursue that religion with my own children, there wasn’t any need to outline what I believed because there was nothing in my belief system that would ostracize or make my kids stand out so much that it required explanation. In school-school, it just doesn’t matter (unless you’re trying to skimp on the snacks for holiday parties – then you get the evil eye from the Room Mothers… but since I usually was one of the Room Mothers and usually first in line with holiday coordinated store-bought home-made goodies, that wasn’t really an issue for me.) Yeah, I was that mom. Even I hated me some days… I missed out on all that as a kid, so that had a lot to do with my motivation.
But, I digress… back to the subject at hand.
Fast forward to this past January, and my entry into the homeschooling community; though truthfully, I guess I should say ‘re-entry’. When I was in high school, my mom got fed up with the ‘security’ measures being taken at the local high schools, and decided that we would be homeschooling from then on. She was awesome in her organizational capabilities. I don’t think that there were very many organized homeschool groups back then, but she created one and planned field trips and all kinds of activities for the group.
Even before I had my first child, I knew that I wanted to homeschool my kids. Once my boys were pre-school aged, I started reaching out to the local, and by then far more organized, homeschooling community… and promptly got my hand slapped. Why? Because I was not the right flavor of Christian. At that time, I was indeed a Bible-toting, aspiring Titus 2 woman intent on honoring God by being a dutiful wife and committed mother, and homeschooling was just another step on that path.
The only problem was that I was not a ‘fundamentalist Christian’. I don’t know if these types exist in other places, but you can’t open a Bible ’round here without knocking into one of them, they’re so thick in the South. From what I can gather, the foundation of fundamentalists Christians seems to consist of making sure that their beliefs are in no way challenged, and a great deal of evangelizing with the goal of saving your heathen soul from the eternal flames of hell. Oh, I’m making light of it, of course, but these are some deeply religious folks and a great many of them are both honest and sincere in their belief that it is their duty to at least attempt to bring you to Jesus lest your blood be on their hands come Judgement Day. In some ways, I admire that kind of … faith? I don’t know what it is, really. I don’t want it for myself, or for my kids, but I am happy for them if it makes them so. But if I say that I’m not interested in hearing their message, I don’t think it’s too much to expect that I no longer be pressured to convert.
Since I was a ‘different’ kind of Christian, I was deemed unfit to join or participate in any of the already-formed groups in this area. Even my own religion frowned on inter-faith association, but as they also lacked a homeschooling support network (though homeschooling was pretty common among members of my religion) I was forced to look outside the fold to find support. I don’t know why it came as such a big surprise to be so completely cast out, but it did.
All I really wanted was a group that was inclusive and respectful of other types of Christian beliefs. I don’t care what you believe; I wasn’t looking for religious flavor in my kids’ education. I just wanted a group of homeschooling moms to talk with and learn from and hang out with when we had time. Most of the groups already formed here required members to sign a statement of faith (and still do). I wanted a more secularly based group so that the religion thing didn’t come up or create conflict. If there had been a secular group available, I’d have joined it in a second! But there wasn’t so it was either suffer in silence or start a new group. Once I thought about it, starting a group myself sounded more and more like a good idea. I could create a group with a more open-minded atmosphere so that I, and others like me, would be both welcome and comfortable participating without worrying about the religion factor.
And that’s pretty much the kind of group we have. Though we’re open to pretty much anyone, there is definitely a certain ‘type’ who would simply not be comfortable in our group. On one hand that bothers me. On the other, there are 5 (FIVE!!) Christian-based homeschooling support/co-op groups here – no 6 if you count the super-secret group that is by invitation only that I just learned about – so I think there’s plenty of support for that ‘type’. I don’t want to have an issue because my kid pulls out an h-e-double hockey sticks when he is wronged or wears a tee-shirt covered in skulls, or the conversation turns to last week’s True Blood or planning for a field trip to the local Buddhist Temple. We’re not trying to step on anyone’s toes, but we do recommend steel-toed boots if you’re going to hang with us. {wink}
It’s fascinating to me how much religion matters to the vast majority of homeschoolers out there; how dividing beliefs can be in this day and age. I thought we were moving more towards acceptance and respect as a society, not clinging to and even reinforcing the thoughts and ideas that segregate us along chosen lines. It’s just so odd to me that there are actually people out there who feel like having a non-religious person, or a person who is a different religion than they are, being around their kids is so dangerous and damaging to them that they create what is essentially a closed community within which to raise them. A community that they actively guard and protect against any thought or idea that might present options to their kids outside of those that they find acceptable. It’s sad, really. Those kids are every bit as oppressed as any other group of people who has been given only a certain portion of freedom or purposely limited in knowledge and access to information and experience. That is exactly the kind of environment that gives the homeschooling community such a bad reputation.
For me, homeschooling is partially about experiencing life outside the classroom. Classrooms have walls and boundaries that make it so difficult for a child to experience life as long as they have to be cooped up in one, and I certainly don’t want my homeschool to have barriers before my children because of my beliefs. I don’t think that closed-mindedness has any place in education. My religious beliefs have evolved quite a bit over the years and I’ve come to see belief as a fluid thing. It’s ever-changing in response to what life hands me and I’m fine with that. I tend to think that belief is a journey, not a destination; though I am sure that makes me a very scary lady to some. But you know what? As I said on SecularHomeschooling.com,
I’m awesome; my kids are awesome and if your beliefs don’t allow for the sunshine in my world to brighten yours, then I am not the one missing out {wink}
~h
Warmly,
~h
Sunday Surf for Sept. 5
To start the morning off (okay – afternoon… it’s been a long and busy week and I am playing catch-up in a major way!!), I thought we could take a moment to share a song from the Atheist’s Hymnal with Steve Martin.
From there, I thought we could visit with Madeline Bea Photography’s Sunday Creative prompt. Since I’ve been kid-free this weekend (the boys have been at my parent’s house all weekend, and are out with my Loverly Husband for a visit to his grandmother), I thought it might be nice to see if something she’s posted lately provides some creative inspiration.
I also really enjoyed ‘The Gift of Time’ at Homeschooling With Attitude.
TX Parks and Wildlife’s Be an Outdoor Kid site has fun stuff for the kiddies that encourages outdoor play and exploration.
Kids.gov is a site we’ve been on frequently in the past week. We’ve been working on a lapbook for the Constitution, and it’s come in quite handy.
Moms Rising is an activist site that has a form letter that can be customized and sent to your senator to urge them to co-sponsor S.593 – the Ban Poisonous Additives Act of 2009 – and support amending it to the Senate Food Safety Modernization Act. Since we just talked about BPA in the water bottles we’re putting in the field trip boxes, I thought this was an apt addition to today’s post! Moms Rising is a great site anyway, with tons of articles dealing with making America more ‘family friendly’. Mothers Acting Up is another cool mommy activism site.
I’ve found Sister Dottie S. Dixon to be quite entertaining… as the proud mother of a gay son, Mormon Mom Dottie is (in her own words) ‘Plum full of dicey opinions, wisdoms and sage advice’. Her YouTube vids are… enlightening, to say the least.
I know this is short today, so apologies… other than my blog and Facebook, I really haven’t been doing much blogsurfing this week. Hopefully, some of the other SS participants will have some cool stuff to click. Be sure to check them out : Breastfeeding Moms Unite, Domesticated Women, This Adventure Life, Maman A Droit, Hobo Mama and Baby Dust Diaries.
Warmly,
~h
Religion = good behavior?
(Notes on this post: I was gone all afternoon on Thursday, so this is my Secular Thursday post for this week, even though today is Saturday; and this post comes about in contemplation of this article, Study: Religion is Good for Kids.)
I consider myself a spiritual person in that I have a strong moral code and set of beliefs about deity that I adhere to in order to explain the unexplainable, and my beliefs may or may not agree with yours. I’m really fine with that. I even enjoy discussing religion as a topic, and as long as your plan is to merely share your beliefs and not to attempt to bash me over the head with your Jesus stick or shove your bible down my throat in a misguided attempt at ‘saving’ me, then even if we fundamentally disagree on every point, in my opinion, we can still be friends.
Now, before we go much further I will admit that, living in the Bible Belt, when I hear reference to ‘religion’ I automatically assume that you’re talking about Christianity. I realize that I may be showing my small town southern roots here, but since most of my comments about the theory of “religion=good kids” are in relation to how some Christian authors tell you how to raise kids and my own experiences with Christianity, and since the resulting clashes in child rearing philosophy between what they advocate and what I think is good and right have left a somewhat negative impression on me, that’s my bias.
If you’ve read here before, then you may have seen commentary about certain so-called ‘Christian’ authors who advocate practices that can only be described as child abuse. I have been fairly vocal about my opinions of such authors, but have not really delved into the ‘why’. Aside from the obvious, my personal child-rearing philosophy is quite different from theirs. Even if you take away the abusive aspects, I would still not recommend these authors’ ideas because of the way they perceive the nature of a child to be (i.e.: sinful and selfish, out to manipulate, etc.)
To be clear, I am in no way saying that all Christian parents are abusive, nor am I equating a religious upbringing (regardless of sect) with abusive households in every case. What I am exploring here is my own experience with a Christian upbringing and the tendency among Christian parents to use corporal punishment as a first line of defense for all transgressions, both small and great, to control and coerce children into what is viewed as acceptable (and therefore ‘godly’) behavior.
I really have a problem with them using religion as an indicator of behavior in small children. It sends the message that the end result justifies whatever means you use to achieve that. For lots of Christian families, the tools they use can border on abuse, both physical and emotional. I am not outright opposed to spanking as many are, but I do think that we parents are surely intelligent enough to reach our children without resorting to physical punishment from the get-go. From my own experience, we were spanked without consideration of the external factors that contributed to the situation and were usually expected to accept punishment with a minimum of fuss or else face additional punishment if we failed to get our emotions under control within the alloted time frame. We were expected to ‘straighten up and fly right with only a word, because we knew that the consequence for failing to mind was severe and painful.
In such an environment, of course the children will ‘behave’ – they’re terrified of getting into trouble! I was always looking for a way, any way, to avoid getting in trouble. Telling the truth netted a spanking most of the time, as would lying, but a lie would delay the spanking for however long. When you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t, what would you do to save your butt? It’s hardly fair to compare the behavior of children from a home where the parents, because of their religious beliefs, require strict obedience and/or a joyful attitude even in the face of painful punishment to those who come from homes where the children are treated as whole human beings with the same rights owed to them as any adult. You wouldn’t punish your friend who was grouchy because she was hungry or tired, you’d make excuses for them, or offer them food or facilitate a nap if possible. Why are children, who are less capable of attributing grouchiness to another need than adults are, not worthy of being treated similarly?
If you take out the word “religion” and substitute “strong moral code”, then I pretty much agree with much of what the article says. I don’t think that any of the results that the researcher found would not be able to be duplicated in an environment where the parents had a strong network of support from similarly minded peers (for example, regular attendance at a playgroup, parenting support group or homeschooling group meeting). Frequency may play a role, and as few of those other type groups are so rigid or structured as religious services the results may not be exactly comparable, but I don’t think that the characteristics that they polled (behavior, self-control, social skills and approaches to learning) are limited to ‘religious’ families – I think it has more to do with support in general.
One of the primary ‘lessons’ I came away with as an adult is to hide emotions. Even now, I am not all that great at reflecting how I am feeling and it took me a long time to stop ‘acting’ happy when I darn well wasn’t. That’s not what I want for my kids, and even though it is more challenging to watch them act how they feel, it is comforting to me to know that my children are in touch with their feelings, and we’re all learning to communicate and address needs better because of it.
The last paragraph of the article reads,
“There are certain expectations about children’s behavior within a religious context, particularly within religious worship services,” he said. These expectations might frustrate parents, he said, and make congregational worship “a less viable option if they feel their kids are really poorly behaved.”
I assert that ‘poorly behaved’ is a misleading phrase. If ‘poorly behaved’ means that my kids are more impulsive (because they didn’t get their hands slapped every time they reached for something) or less apt to sit still for long periods of time (because they weren’t threatened with a wooden spoon if they wiggled during church) or be quiet when they feel they’ve been wronged (because they weren’t conditioned to accept punishment because they’ve probably done something to be punished for that wasn’t witnessed), but you know what? I’m okay with that. In fact, I prefer it.
I saw a tee-shirt the other say that said, “Know Religion, No Peace. No Religion, Know Peace”. While I don’t think that’s necessarily true in all cases, I find it to be a provocative statement that might be worth your consideration.
Warmly,
~h
Tame Child-Creatures
I saw this posted the other day on Facebook. I and copied it to my TAL FB page, but ever since then, it’s been on my mind. I’ve been thinking about ‘tame child-creatures’ and comparing my own heathen horde with them and have thus far come out glad that our home contains none of these docile small people.
I’ll be blunt here; sometimes, homeschooling sucks, and when you have children who have been taught that their thoughts and opinions matter, and as a result of that, are used to being heard, listening to a 25 minute treatise on ‘Why We Shouldn’t Have to do Math Today’ can be doubly tiresome. We’ve spent the last couple of months in a bit of a rut. If you’ve been reading here lately, there have been a few posts whining about being tired and irritated. I would apologize for that, but I won’t lest I be accused of perpetuating the false notion that homeschooling is always hunky-dory.
I reached a breaking point (mental exhaustion-induced, I think now) and almost threw in the towel on homeschooling. After some discussion and intervention by Loverly Husband, some mindful cooperative parenting/homeschooling, a bunch of deep housekeeping and home-blessing projects and a substantial break and family vacation over the past two weeks, we’ve been successful in reigning in our kids a bit, setting some reasonable expectations and clearer boundaries and are getting back on an even keel.
That’s not to say that everything is comin’ up roses; we’re currently battling a little bit of First World Entitlement Syndrome (which has resulted in some serious discussions about their status in life and some plans on Mom/Teacher’s part to work in more hands-on direct contact with those less fortunate in our community).
All that aside though, I like that my kids have… personality. I am grateful that they’re thinkers and leaders – they question things; they don’t follow blindly and they’re confident that they will be heard. I count that as an accomplishment in my parenting career that my kids know that they can have their own opinions about things and that they feel free to express them. I admit that I have been embarrassed by them in public – what mom hasn’t? But most often, my embarrassment has come from me buying into some unrealistic stereotype that I momentarily feel pressured to conform to… like the idea that ‘good mothers’ have children who are mild-mannered, calm and quiet – especially in grocery stores.
I recently unsubscribed from a homeschooling support group because of the overwhelming presence of parents who want ‘tame child-creatures’; parents who have an unrealistic ideal in their head that their normally exuberant children don’t meet – and perhaps worse are the parents who are all too willing to share their favorite spirit-crushing methods of enforcing conformity. It got to the point that I was nauseated sometimes to read about some of the things parent’s have done to get those picture-perfect kids (like incorporating a spray bottle to squirt an errant child – like you might a puppy… srsly?? o_O).
The attitude seems to be that the long-term effects don’t matter (if they’re taken into consideration at all); as long as they present a good image to the world (or group) then whatever you do in the name of enforcing conformity is fine. I think that’s dishonest and downright harmful to the kids. It’s a mistake to think that in creating tame child-creatures, you’re actually molding the personality. If your child is wild at heart, you can discipline and punish the things you don’t like – but all that’s creating is a good actor. Sooner or later, that wild heart will break through, sometimes with tragic consequences. Wouldn’t it be ever so much better to work with your child to shape him or her into a productive adult? We all have flaws and personality quirks that will serve us in various ways as adults. As parents, we’re supposed to think in the long-term. Facilitating our child’s inherent traits to maximize future potential is in our job description. I believe that learning to ask questions will serve my kids better as adults than obedience. Confidence trumps conformity. Lead, don’t follow.
There’s balance, of course. We’re aiming for delightfully cultivated wild children here – not feral brats. I am not suggesting that children who are allowed to run free with absolutely no boundaries or expectations are better; they might even be worse. No one wants to deal with bratty children who haven’t been taught common courtesies. It makes me wonder how many parents go to the ‘tame’ extreme because they’re afraid of having a ‘brat’; and furthermore, how much the ‘tame’ and ‘bratty’ children contribute to the problem because other parents only see the two extremes – the oh-so-appealing docile and obedient child who never gives a moment’s trouble and the obnoxious, loud feral child who has no concept of his or her role in society.
I like the natural indulgence in the fullness of the moment that kids seem to live in when they’re allowed to; it’s a reminder to me to live in the ‘now’. If they’re a little loud, so what? If they’re a little bouncy, that’s usually okay, too. A few well-placed reminders do the job nicely. It’s more work, sure – you have to be present and paying attention to your kids a lot of the time. But that’s mindful parenting, not performance parenting and that’s what we’re working towards. Cultivating wild children means that you’re actively involved in what your kids are doing now, not trotting them out like show ponies. Even with all the effort that goes into striving for balance, I think I’d rather embrace the wild than train and tame.
Warmly,
~h
November 28, 2011 | Categories: Attachment Parenting, Lessons Learned, Parenting, Rambling Thoughts, Religion, Secular Thursday, She said WHAT?, Socialization | Tags: attachment parenting, balance, commentary, homeschool group dynamics, homeschooling stereotypes, methods, mindful parenting, raising responsible adults, secular homeschooling, Secular Thursday, SuperMom Complex, unrealistic expectations | 4 Comments »