I tend to vote Republican because I find that I am in general economically and socially conservative. But it is becoming increasingly more embarrassing to live under this banner.
I did not vote for Barak Obama, primarily because of my pro-life convictions. However, the man is our president. I cannot accept the implication made by many that he is unmitigated evil and the sign of impending apocalypse. I have a greater confidence in the providence of God and the resilience of our political system than most, I suppose.
Today’s local paper says that ‘many’ parents are not wanting their children to listen to President Obama’s speech to school children next Tuesday, and our school district is allowing them to opt out. I find this a bit over the top, but schools will always be composed of eccentrics, and so I can overlook it. What really got me was this quote from the chair of the Florida Republican Party:
“I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama’s socialist ideology,” Greer said in a statement. “I do not support using our children as tools to spread liberal propaganda.”
I find this not only embarrassing but naïve as well. It is embarrassing because like him or not, he is our president. He will embrace policies with which I disagree, but he is our president, and is owed the respect that that office gives to him.
But it is naïve as well. Does Mr. Greer and the other parents not understand that schools are all about indoctrination? Not just public schools mind you. SCHOOLS. We home school, and we are all about leading our children to understand the world in a certain way. We are, as it were, ‘using our children to spread a Christian world view’. If he or any of the other parents are concerned about a liberal agenda and see it only in the assumed content of the president’s speech, that is amazingly simplistic.
Please understand: this is not a rant about public schools. I know many who do a wonderful job in those schools. I know many Christians who bring their Christianity to bear in amazing ways in those halls. And I know many parents whose children are prospering there, prospering as Christians.
But any parent with their children in a public school knows that he or she needs to monitor and address what is received there helping the child to embrace what is true, question what is not, and discern the difference. That is called ‘education’. And that is exactly how we ought to approach the president’s address.
I think in protest that I will make sure my son watches the president’s speech on Tuesday. He might just be challenged to pursue something good. And if there is a scary liberal agenda operative, I can think of no better opportunity to hear it, critique it, and learn from it.
I’m ready to sign up for independency. Any reason I shouldn’t?
+ + + + +
UPDATE: Similar thoughts from someone better known here.
Staci Thomas
I completely agree with this. The response by Republicans on this news item is leaning toward the ridiculous. The five of us will be watching on Tuesday as well. My children can certainly benefit from someone as important as the President of this great nation telling them that their education is important. And if we sense a hidden agenda in the speech, well, we'll try to figure out what it is and craft an articulate response. Staci
Randy Greenwald
Leaning? You are more gracious than I.
MagistraCarminum
The only reason not to jump ship is so you can vote in primaries…unless you live in a state where anyone can vote in primaries. Here in NM, you have to belong to a party, and then vote in the primaries for that party. The Republicans are not a group I care to defend. But often, the individuals are still my best choice.You might be intrigued (as I am) by the writings of Stanley Fish. I agree with him up to a point…and then mostly end up disagreeing with him because of his naivete concerning indoctrination… but his thoughts about education are provocative:http://tinyurl.com/5mpvb4
Matthew
The only question I have is why does this speech have to be given while these children are at school? Why couldn't he give the speech in the evening when parents could decide if they wanted their children to watch. I think what concerns most people is the fact that this is unprecedented. Independents are not only irrelevant they are normally further the extremes of left and right.P.S. I can't stand when people call the President a socialist. It makes conservatives sound horrible.
Randy Greenwald
Chris, it is with an eye to the primaries that I've stayed in so long. But I'm beginning to question the strength of that argument.And, Matthew, I can't figure out why anyone would have a problem with the sitting president speaking to school children. I believe on 9/11/01 President Bush was doing so personally at an elementary school here in Sarasota. The only thing unprecedented is the technology.Anyway, thanks for the comments, all.
Gail and Keith
People calling Obama's agenda Socialist shows that they do not understand what Socialism is. Okay, okay, I don't either, but the agenda Obama is pushing is not Socialist. I'll leave it to others to explain in short detail what it is and isn't.G
Matthew
I think the only problem I really had was the material that was sent to teachers before his speech. One of the things that they were supposed to have the children do is to "Write a letter to yourself how you can help President Obama" Yes you need to lend a sitting president support but isn't he here for us? Not the other way around?P.s. The white house revised the wording later but originally this that is what it said