Is our children learning?

Wow. The part about the Magna Carta is even better.

Maybe Frothy can win in "moderate" New Hampshire after all.

That's unpossible!!!

Writing equals Socialism!

Just tell me where to put my X.

Trolltastic headline is trolltastic.

I'm about as liberal as they come, and I disagree with the bill in question. But it does not "allow[] parents the choice to not educate their children."

They're trying to out-RON PAUL RON PAUL.

"The Constitution isn't in the Magna Carta!"

LIVE DERP OR DIE!!

Since learning to read and write could cause ideas to spread, a form of intellectual socialism, education will no longer be allowed or tolerated.

That'll be a fun curriculum to write up.. any and all of it can be replaced at the request of each parent, for each student..

Education is counter to the GOP's main platform of corporate enslavement of the masses, after all.

bugontherug: I'm about as liberal as they come, and I disagree with the bill in question. But it does not "allow[] parents the choice to not educate their children."

Step 1: Object, in writing, to all of the coursework.
Step 2: Propose another line of coursework
Step 3: Don't provide the coursework
Step 4: Don't be evaluated by the evaluation process that doesn't exist, and don't be penalized by the penalties that don't exist.

Totaly trolltastic headline and article.

FTFA: Such policy shall include a provision requiring the parent or legal guardian to notify the school principal or designee in writing of the specific material to which they object and a provision requiring an alternative agreed upon by the school district and the parent, at the parent's expense, sufficient to enable the child to meet state requirements for education in the particular subject area.

Then 1 sentence later: As worded, any parent could object to the entire curriculum and substitute whatever they wanted instead, with no measurement or assessment or accountability for that "alternative material" requirement, which means compulsory education would be dead, dead, dead.

I think we have moved from just trolling to out right lying

Oops:

Step 5: Prophet

You don't need book-learnin' eff you got common sense!

Teach 'em guns 'n oil. That'll learm 'em real gud.

pdee: I think we have moved from just trolling to out right lying

See my steps above. It's really not that hard.

The parent and school district have to agree on a subject matter, but there is no evaluation of the execution, or even a provision to verify if the subject matter is being provided.

markfara: You don't need book-learnin' eff you got common sense!

"Common Sense Ain't."

Less competition in the workforce

Wow.

Are you guys sure they didn't spell Florida wrong? That is some ridiculous shiat.

Alphax: That'll be a fun curriculum to write up.. any and all of it can be replaced at the request of each parent, for each student..

Hmm...how long until they use this as justification to cut teachers' salaries, saying that the parents, not teachers, are planning the curriculum?

Educated elite arugula eating commies have no place in New Hampshire.

Skleenar: bugontherug: I'm about as liberal as they come, and I disagree with the bill in question. But it does not "allow[] parents the choice to not educate their children."

Step 1: Object, in writing, to all of the coursework.
Step 2: Propose another line of coursework
Step 3: Don't provide the coursework
Step 4: Don't be evaluated by the evaluation process that doesn't exist, and don't be penalized by the penalties that don't exist.

It's hard to say without a detailed statutory analysis, but I would suppose that whatever penalties normally attach to not educating your child would also attach to a parent who abused the law that way. If the parent(s) never intended to follow through with the alternative coursework at all, I could even see adding a fraud charge.

Earpj: I...Why would one do this?? I mean, yeah...I live in Texas, so I know of stupid curriculum...but, I just supplement what my kids are learning.

I see, potentially, a lot of kids who won't be getting into college...maybe...

Should be interesting to see the outcome of this....

The outcome is going to be higher teen pregnancy rates and more people believing in creationism, since sex ed and science are pretty obviously what the lawmakers had in mind. I mean, what else in the curriculum is "objectionable" to Republicans?

/aside from "facts"

badhatharry: It is necessary for children to be educated properly in order to come to love Big Brother. So everyone has to do it Big Brother's way.

Kind of lost you after this.

/Whitest teeth I ever came across.

But where will little Johnny learn that white people are the most evil scourge of the universe without compulsory indoctrination classes?

pdee: Then 1 sentence later: As worded, any parent could object to the entire curriculum and substitute whatever they wanted instead, with no measurement or assessment or accountability for that "alternative material" requirement, which means compulsory education would be dead, dead, dead.

Well, I think their point is that there's no enforcement mechanism for that requirement. But I don't see why whatever normal enforcement mechanism exists wouldn't apply to a parent who abused this law.

Molavian: But where will little Johnny learn that white people are the most evil scourge of the universe without compulsory indoctrination classes?

He could watch one of the Republican debates.. if that doesn't do it, nothing will..

Perhaps they ate the Fryed Stake and Vag Lasguna at the Yablokoff-Wallace Dining Center

Alphax: Molavian: But where will little Johnny learn that white people are the most evil scourge of the universe without compulsory indoctrination classes?

He could watch one of the Republican debates.. if that doesn't do it, nothing will..

Gave this both "smart" and "funny" clicks.

I hate the GOP as much as the next guy; but, we opted out of public school in Virginia and put one of my kids in college at fifteen.

The clincher is that the parents must be interested in teaching their kids; if not, coupled with other GOP laws in the works, it is simply a way to make children sub-minimum wage earners before they are eighteen...

Is this the new trend with liberals? Post an article with a lie in the headline, a lie in the article, and then include a quote about the law that proves you're lying?

IX-c. Require school districts to adopt a policy allowing an exception to specific course material based on a parent's or legal guardian's determination that the material is objectionable. Such policy shall include a provision requiring the parent or legal guardian to notify the school principal or designee in writing of the specific material to which they object and a provision requiring an alternative agreed upon by the school district and the parent, at the parent's expense, sufficient to enable the child to meet state requirements for education in the particular subject area. The name of the parent or legal guardian and any specific reasons disclosed to school officials for the objection to the material shall not be public information and shall be excluded from access under RSA 91-A.

This woman is either retarded, a liar, illiterate, or both. What a wonderful job the school system did with her. Bonus? The majority of the comments are as stupid as she is.

bugontherug: Gave this both "smart" and "funny" clicks.

likewise. Where do they get that trash?

HMS_Blinkin: The outcome is going to be higher teen pregnancy rates and more people believing in creationism, since sex ed and science are pretty obviously what the lawmakers had in mind. I mean, what else in the curriculum is "objectionable" to Republicans?

/aside from "facts"

Also, the US economy (what's left of it) will drop because there aren't enough people to fill the high-tech jobs anymore.

If you think about it, it's rather nice of the US to step out of the way to allow more up-and-coming nations to take over the science and tech leadership for a while.

bugontherug: Well, I think their point is that there's no enforcement mechanism for that requirement. But I don't see why whatever normal enforcement mechanism exists wouldn't apply to a parent who abused this law.

bugontherug: It's hard to say without a detailed statutory analysis, but I would suppose that whatever penalties normally attach to not educating your child would also attach to a parent who abused the law that way. If the parent(s) never intended to follow through with the alternative coursework at all, I could even see adding a fraud charge.

So, then, who's going to catch the parents who've abused the law? How will it ever come to the attention of the agency that would file the fraud charge? What agency would that be, the Dept of education? It's not like the law is authorizing and funding an enforcement arm of the Dept of education to check up on these families.

That's right, danged it!! It's 'bout time we protect our yung'ns from this fancy book learnin' stuff. Readin' and riten' ain't gunna git'em nowheres anyhow...thems jest needs to lern to do wut thems is told to do! That edumacation stuff is wut them better'n thou commie lib'rils do, danged it...and I don't want no parts of it!!

Well at least the kiddies can stand in a line and wave while the rest of the world leaves them in the dust.

Skleenar: pdee: I think we have moved from just trolling to out right lying

See my steps above. It's really not that hard.

The parent and school district have to agree on a subject matter, but there is no evaluation of the execution, or even a provision to verify if the subject matter is being provided.

Well, as long as we're making stuff up (the liberal way), I'll counter with state standardized tests, which the child will probably still have to take. I don't actually have any idea, but since you don't, either, I think it's a fair argument.

It's called home schooling and people have been doing it for years with great academic success. It kind of dings the student in a social aspect however.

Having a truly educated populace is a danger to both parties. Democrats and Republicans.

This just makes me comfortable that they are currently filtering out our next presidential candidates.

It's funny when the derptastic blog we're linked to quotes in detail the law where it completely invalidates his thesis.

IX-c. Require school districts to adopt a policy allowing an exception to specific course material based on a parent's or legal guardian's determination that the material is objectionable. Such policy shall include a provision requiring the parent or legal guardian to notify the school principal or designee in writing of the specific material to which they object and a provision requiring an alternative agreed upon by the school district and the parent, at the parent's expense, sufficient to enable the child to meet state requirements for education in the particular subject area. The name of the parent or legal guardian and any specific reasons disclosed to school officials for the objection to the material shall not be public information and shall be excluded from access under RSA 91-A.

So, you have to choose a specific item, you have to propose an alternative that the school district agrees with, and it has to be sufficient to meet the state requirements in the subject area.

Can the parents opt for the Newt Gingrich Little Janitors grade school curriculum?

Skleenar: bugontherug: I'm about as liberal as they come, and I disagree with the bill in question. But it does not "allow[] parents the choice to not educate their children."

Step 1: Object, in writing, to all of the coursework.
Step 2: Propose another line of coursework
Step 3: Don't provide the coursework
Step 4: Don't be evaluated by the evaluation process that doesn't exist, and don't be penalized by the penalties that don't exist.

Step 5: Profit?

bill to require all legislation to be rooted in the Magna Carta

Anyone know where they lifted this idea from?

A reporter managed to discover that at least one of the sponsors didn't have a clue as to what's actually in the Magna Carta, so obviously these guys aren't keen students of the history of laws and constitutions. I'm guessing they had to have been listening to one of the dumber Repub talk shows one day when the host was ranting about the good old days of 1215 and they looked at each other and thought 'hmmmm... yeah, that's the ticket.'

So who's the Magna Carta freak -- Beck? Someone else? And what's the draw for right-wingers? Does it mention Jesus?

Why didn't they go back to Moses while they were at it? (Yeah, I know about the establishment clause, and you know about it, but I'm guessing these three don't.)