Posts Tagged ‘freedom’
By Heather Clark
Christian News Network
As previously reported, Elane Huguenin and her husband Jon run Elane Photography in Albuquerque. In 2006, when Vanessa Willock, a lesbian, approached Elane and requested that she photograph her commitment ceremony, Huguenin declined, stating that she only covers traditional weddings.
The situation soon ended up before the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, who ruled against Huguenin in 2008, stating that she was guilty of violating the state’s “sexual orientation” discrimination law. New Mexico law prohibits “any person in a public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services …to any person because of…sexual orientation.” The commission then ordered the photographer to pay nearly $7,000 in fines for refusing to shoot the ceremony. Click here to continue reading.
A “Common Core” For a Global Community: What’s In Store For the Education of Today’s Children? written by Berit Kjos is our newest Lighthouse Trails Print Booklet Tract. This is the fourth to last Booklet Tract we will be presenting before the end of this year. This is number 31.The booklet tract is 16 pages long and sells for $1.95 for single copies. Quantity discounts are as much as 50% off retail. Below is the content of the booklet. To order copies of A “Common Core” For a Global Community, click here.
A “Common Core” For a Global Community: What’s In Store For the Education of Today’s Children?
By Berit Kjos
While preparing this booklet, I came across a headline that illustrates the corrupt values and shameless propaganda behind UNESCO’s Common Core indoctrination. Ponder this assignment: “Students Asked to ‘Argue That Jews Are Evil’ and Prove Nazi Loyalty in Assignment Linked to Common Core.”1 In other words, traditional values are out! Shocking propaganda is in! I hope this booklet will help parents, concerned educators, and our children prepare together for the spiritual battlefields ahead.
The task before UNESCO . . . is to help the emergence of a single world culture with its own philosophy and background of ideas and with its own broad purpose.2 —Julian Huxley, the first head of UNESCO, 1947
The International Agenda
The goal of education has changed! Our public schools no longer teach the kind of literacy, history, math, and morality we once considered essential to responsible citizenship. The new agenda infiltrating our schools is designed to train a new generation of postmodern “progressive” students to believe whatever might serve a pre-determined “common good.”
If their educators succeed, tomorrow’s students will have neither the facts nor the freedom needed for independent thinking. Their “common core” will be based on a global collective agenda, not on Western democracy or Christian values. Like Nazi youth, they will be taught to react, not think, when nudged to do the unthinkable.
Dr. Thomas Sowell summarized this mind-changing process in a 1993 article titled “Indoctrinating the Children”:
The techniques of brainwashing developed in totalitarian countries are routinely used in psychological conditioning programs imposed on American school children. These include emotional shock and desensitization, psychological isolation from sources of support, stripping away defenses, manipulative cross-examination of the individual’s underlying moral values, and inducing acceptance of alternative values by psychological rather than rational means.3
What Exactly is “Common Core”?
According to one source, “Common Core” education is:
. . . a U.S. education initiative that seeks to bring diverse state curricula into alignment with each other by following the principles of standards-based education reform. The initiative is sponsored by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).4
It’s hard to define the actual Common Core standards. Shrouded in positive promises and perplexing assertions, many ordinary readers are left wondering what’s true or false. Faced with open-ended and unfamiliar terminology, concerned parents are confused and discouraged. They may recognize the false marketing and deceptive propaganda, but they don’t know where to find honest answers. For example, the mission statement posted at “Common Core State Standards Initiative” website is anything but clear:
The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.5
What does it mean by “robust”? Is it “relevant” to the success of all students or just to those who will embrace the spreading immorality and group thinking?
Those confusing but nice-sounding promises brought rapid enthusiasm among some parents, but skepticism is now growing fast. Just ponder the statements below. How do we interpret words such as “clearer and higher” or “rigorous contents”? What does “rigorous” mean in a classroom where facts are replaced by group speculations and dialectical thinking? How can concerned parents find answers to bewildering slogans such as these:
Fewer, clearer, and higher, to best drive effective policy and practice
Aligned with college and work expectations
Inclusive of rigorous content and applications of knowledge through higher-order skills
Internationally benchmarked, so that all students are prepared for succeeding in our global economy
Research and evidence-based.6
This global agenda is far more intrusive, demanding, and dangerous to Christian families than most of us can imagine. So ponder this important warning:
UNESCO’s efforts in the 1960s and 1970s to influence U.S. school curriculum were unsuccessful. But now UNESCO has found a sugar daddy. On November 17, 2004 at UNESCO’s headquarters in Paris, UNESCO signed a 26-page “Cooperation Agreement” with Microsoft Corporation to develop a “master curriculum (Syllabus)” for teacher training in information technologies based on standards, guidelines, benchmarks, and assessment techniques. The Agreement states that . . . “UNESCO will explore how to facilitate content development.”
Following the signing of the Agreement, UNESCO Director General Koichiro Matsuura explained it in a speech. One of its goals, he said, is “fostering web-based communities of practice including content development and worldwide curricula reflecting UNESCO values.” No doubt that is agreeable to Bill Gates because the Agreement states that “Microsoft supports the objectives of UNESCO as stipulated in UNESCO’s Constitution.”7
Not long after, Bill Gates (one of the big funders for Common Core) and his UNESCO partners prepared the following “core standards.” Notice that they are much more to the point and threatening than the previous propaganda.
Environmental education will be incorporated in formal education.
Any value or attitude held by anyone globally that stands independent to that of the United Nations’ definition of “sustainable education” must change. Current attitudes are unacceptable.
Education will be belief-and-spirituality based as defined by the global collective.
Environmental education will be integrated into every subject, not just science8
Today’s emphasis on “saving the earth” will surely involve mental manipulation and moral degradation. The earth-centered “new” spirituality will fit well in a culture of promiscuity, propaganda, and paganism. And the seductions of the occult will speed the rising hostility toward biblical truth and values. Everything must change! Make no mistake about it, in a world where the “global collective” determines the outcome, Christianity will not be tolerated! History has proven that.
The Global Roots of “Common Core” Education
Parents beware! A New World Order is rising. The seeds for this transformation were planted long ago, but few saw the warning signs. Now that the evidence is too vast to deny, we need to prepare our children for a different kind of world—a world where an educated and responsible citizenry no longer exists in sufficient numbers to maintain the rule of law and individual freedom.
Today’s education goals were envisioned more than a century ago by socialist American and British elites who steered the process from behind the scenes. Though the labels and faces changed throughout the years, they all served a globalist vision of a totalitarian world equipped to conform young minds to a socialist humanistic system.
Each decade brought us closer to the fulfillment of that anti-Christian agenda. “Common Core” (CC)—also called “Common Core Standards” (CCS) or “Common Core State Standards” (CCSS—is the latest version of an international education plan. These deceptive labels hide the global agenda—at least for the moment.
“Common Core” is the latest extension of previous programs aimed at mind-changing compliance with UNESCO’s evolving guidelines. You may remember some of the past titles: Education for All, Outcome-Based Education, Quality Learning, No Child Left Behind, etc. In the years ahead, new labels and propaganda will surely continue to push this global agenda forward until the purposes of the world’s elite masters are accomplished. In an article titled “The Spiritualization of Science, Technology and Education in a One-World Society,” Dr. Martin Erdmann rightly states:
[Change agent] Aldous Huxley envisioned a future world society totally controlled by an elite group of scientists. His best-known fictional work explicating this dire prospect bore the title Brave New World. Years later he would “revisit” his prognostications only to conclude that he had underestimated the rate of change.9
Aldous, brother of the prominent Julian Huxley who served as the first Director-General of UNESCO, was raised among British socialist/globalist elites (some of whom funded Communism in Russia). He shared their vision and glimpsed their totalitarian goals. Of course, he didn’t know that more than half a century later, the global-minded Bill Gates would use his wealth to help establish that long-term vision:
Gates’ astronomical wealth has persuaded millions that Common Core is the solution to education problems.10
As you scroll down the century-long chronology below, notice the powerful people, the elitist organizations, and the wealthy foundations that have planned, steered, and funded the amoral transformation of our schools, churches, and communities. Their common goal is global socialism: a totalitarian New World Order!
1905. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching was founded by Andrew Carnegie in 1905 and chartered in 1906 by an act of the United States Congress. Together with other Carnegie Foundations, it has been a major promoter and funder of socialistic global education projects.11
1908. John Dewey, known as the socialist father of modern (i.e., progressive) education, laid the foundations for a revolutionary transformation of American schools. In “Religion and Our Schools,” he wrote, “Our schools . . . are performing an infinitely significant religious work. They are promoting the social unity out of which in the end genuine religious unity must grow. . . . dogmatic [Christian] beliefs . . . we see . . . disappearing.12
1919. The Institute of International Education was established with a grant from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. . . . John Dewey (socialist) served on its National Advisory Council.13
1933. John Dewey, honorary president of the National Education Association (NEA), co-authored the first Humanist Manifesto, which stated: “Any religion that can hope to be a synthesizing and dynamic force for today, must be shaped for the needs of this age.”14
1934. In a report presented at the annual NEA meeting, Willard Givens (later NEA executive secretary) wrote: “all of us, including the ‘owners’ [who might they be?] must be subjected to a large degree of social control . . . . [T]he major function of the school is the social orientation of the individual. It must seek to give him understanding of the transition to a new social order.”15 (emphasis added)
1942. The editor of The Journal of the National Education Association, J. Elmer Morgan, wrote an editorial titled “The United Peoples of the World.” In it, he explained that a world government would need an educational branch, a world system of money and credit, a world police force, “a world bill of rights and duties.”16
1946. “The establishment [UNESCO] marks the culmination of a movement for the creation of an international agency of education. . . . Nations that become members of UNESCO accordingly assume an obligation to revise the textbooks used in their schools . . . . Each member nation . . . has a duty to see to it that nothing in its curriculum . . . is contrary to UNESCO’s aims.”17 (emphasis added)
1946. In his NEA editorial, “The Teacher and World Government,” J. Elmer Morgan, wrote, “In the struggle to establish an adequate world government, the teacher . . . can do much to prepare the hearts and minds of children . . . . At the very top of all the agencies which will assure the coming of world government must stand the school, the teacher, and the organized profession.”18
1947. Julian Huxley wrote in UNESCO: “The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background . . . In its education program it can . . . familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization. . . . Tasks for the media division of UNESCO [will be] to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures . . . to help the emergence of a single world culture.”19
1948. The NEA produced a set of international guidelines called Education for International Understanding in American Schools. It included this statement: “The idea has become established that the preservation of international peace and order may require that force be used to compel a nation to conduct its affairs within the framework of an established world system . . . . Many persons believe that enduring peace cannot be achieved so long as the nation-state system continues as at present constituted. It is a system of international anarchy.”20
1968. Professor John Goodlad reported that Professor Benjamin Bloom [called Father of OBE] “was invited by UNESCO in 1968 to submit a proposal for a six to nine week training program which would partially fulfill recommendations made at UNESCO’s Moscow meeting dealing with the formation of national centers for curriculum development and research.”21
1973. The socialist authors of the Humanist Manifesto II wrote: “We deplore the division of human-kind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community.”22
1976. An NEA program titled A Declaration of Interdependence: Education for a Global Community, was made available to schools across the country . . .. The report said, “Educators around the world are in a unique position to help bring about a harmoniously interdependent global community.”23 Note: That “world community” was officially born in 1945, when Alger Hiss served as Secretary General at the founding of the United Nations.
1985. The curriculum arm of the NEA, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), co-sponsored an international curriculum symposium in the Netherlands. According to Education Week, the ASCD executive director, Dr. Gordon Cawelti, urged representatives of other Western nations and Japan to press for the development of a “world-core curriculum” based on knowledge that will ensure “peaceful and cooperative existence among the human species on this planet.”24
1991. On October 30, the U.S. Coalition for Education for All (USCEFA) convened a conference titled Learning for All: Bridging Domestic and International Education with First Lady Barbara Bush as the honorary chair. It would provide a vital link between the UNESCO plan and U.S. implementation. Partners in this venture included UNESCO, UNICEF, the World Bank, the NEA, and a long string of organizations involved in education at every level:
The coalition was part of a 156-nation network working to reform education worldwide by bridging the gap between individual nations and UNESCO’s Education for All. Keynote speaker Elena Lenskaya, deputy to the Minister of Education of Russia, spoke on the topic, “Education for a New World Order.”25
1993. “The 240 international affiliates of the NEA and the American Federation of Teachers joined to form Education International (EI).”26
Behind that long historical chronology stood influential elites who supported the global vision. They include bankers, presidents, and politicians as well as members of secret societies such as The Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), Skull and Bones, Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission. President Obama is surrounded by global-minded counselors such as Joe Biden, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and others.
So Who Will Rule the Global School?
In 2006, a world-changing event took place. It would revolutionize education, families, faith, and basic values in our fading “land of the free.” I’m referring to the “Moscow Declaration” that was officially adopted on June 2, 2006, by the Education Ministers of the United States, the Russian Federation, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom. The members of this international “Group of Eight” (G-8) have committed their nations to “cooperation in education at all levels in the 21st century.”27
What about America’s “Common Core” standards? How do they fit into the Moscow Declaration?
Marketed to American families as an improved education program, the actual truth about “Common Core” has been hidden. Our government leaders didn’t tell us that we were already committed to a multinational education agenda! But it all makes sense when we consider the century-old movement toward global education and a New World Order!
In one review, a conservative education reporter explained the implication of the “Moscow Declaration”:
Russia’s Science and Education Minister Andrei Fursenko described the declaration as “both a final document of the conference and the document that will be implemented by education ministers of all the world countries and international organizations, including the World Bank, UNESCO, and UN.”28
That certainly sounds like a global education system, doesn’t it? But the American people were kept in the dark! The review continues:
The U.S. Department of Education said the member delegates “pledged to share best practices across borders” to build “education systems that can allow people . . . to live and contribute to a global society.”
What can be expected from the Moscow Declaration? If the historical results of U.S. participation with international reforms continue in the same vein, it is not unreasonable to expect the whole of U.S. education—from preschool, elementary, secondary, and higher education—will encounter further upheaval and decline.29
Today’s sobering realities remind me of the boastful statement made by Nikita Khrushchev back in 1959. Perhaps he was right:
You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.30
Envisioning an Interconnected World
In the global village . . . networks will link students around the world to each other and to a vast body of information and human knowledge.31
That promise was made in 1994 during a trans-Atlantic conference between Washington and Berlin. Education Secretary Richard Riley and Labor Secretary Robert Reich shared strategies for building the Global Village Schools with their German counterparts. They agreed that educational accord will be vital to their goal of “enforcing social transformation.”32
Do you wonder what kind of “social transformation” they planned to enforce? Was personal liberty on their agenda? Or did they seek totalitarian government control as in the French Revolution? What goals and values guided their plans for global education and social transformation? Capitalism? Socialism? Or Communism? Or a new form of totalitarianism?
And where does militant Islam fit into this global power struggle for the collective minds of children? Its ambitious Sharia-minded leaders are unlikely to compromise! And why would they? Corrupt politicians and liberal media masters are bending over backwards to accommodate Islamic “rights.” But Islamic leaders have their own agenda in America as well as in the Middle East, and they will not tolerate our Christian beliefs.
Bombard Children With Mind-Changing Suggestions
A familiar tale told to first-graders in Pennsylvania illustrates both the tactics and the planned transformation of the world. We all know the story of the Little Red Hen who wanted some bread to eat. She asked some of her barnyard friends to help make it. But the cat, the dog, and the goat all said “no.” Finally she did all the work herself. Yet, when the bread was done and its fragrance spread throughout the farm, her unwilling and lazy neighbors were more than willing to help her eat it.
“Won’t you share with us?” they begged.
“No,” she answered. “Since you didn’t help, you don’t get anything.”
In the context of traditional values, the moral of the story might be: you get what you work for. But those who have learned to think and see from the “new” global perspective are led to a different conclusion. Listen to the kinds of questions the first grade teacher asked her class:
Why was the Little Red Hen so stingy? Isn’t it only right that everyone gets to eat? Why wouldn’t she share what she had with some who had none?33
The concerned mother who heard and reported this story asked, “What kinds of values were the children taught?” The new interpretation emphasizes love and sharing, but what is missing? How might it confuse a child’s values?
The answers are obvious. The children were taught socialist values. The new interpretation vilified values that had motivated Americans to be diligent, responsible, and fair. The teacher’s questions were actually strategic suggestions prompting the group to ridicule traditional values, to see reality and society from the new politically correct perspective, and to intimidate and shame anyone who dared to disagree.
A new mental “framework” is vital to the global paradigm shift. But to launch the new system, the old patterns must be blurred, broken, and forgotten. The educational establishment knows that children who are fed a daily diet of biblical truth will resist their plans for change. They also know that students bombarded with strategic suggestions will probably reject Christianity. If schools can build the “right” kind of filter in the minds of young children, the new global beliefs will fit right in.
Focus on Feelings, Not Facts
This shift from factual education to mental manipulation and feeling-based learning began more than seventy years ago. Through the decades, the strategies previously used to manipulate minds in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were developed, first at the Tavistock Clinic near London and later at Germany’s Frankfurt School (originally called Frankfurt Institute for Social Research). Their mind-bending methods soon spread to a rising number of psycho-social research centers in America. They were fine-tuned at Columbia, Harvard, Stanford, and other American universities, at our regional educational laboratories, and at the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies where Elian Gonzales was remediated in preparation for his return to a Communist system.
At the 1989 Governor’s Conference on Education in Kansas, Dr. Shirley McCune, then head of the Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory, summarized the policy in her keynote speech:
The revolution… in curriculum is that we no longer are teaching facts to children…. We no longer see the teaching of facts and information as the primary outcome of education.34
“What will take the place of logic, fact, and analysis in the coming age?” This rhetorical question was raised by Dr. Donald A. Cowan, president emeritus of the University of Dallas. His revealing answer exposes an important step toward the new consensus:
The central way of thought for this new era will be imagination. . . . Imagination will be the active, creative agent of culture, transforming brute materials to a higher, more knowable state.35
A simple example of this process was exposed by a Christian teacher in Sunnyvale, California. During a public elementary school assembly, the students sang the words of the Peacemakers’ Planetary Anthem to the tune of the “Star Spangled Banner.” This melody, which has symbolized freedom to those who have loved America, now became a tactical trigger used to turn hearts from the old ways to the new vision.
To shape “world-class students” who see reality through a multicultural filter, social engineers keep testing their latest modification strategies on our children. One tactic is managed group thinking (the dialectic process) which prompts them to reject their old home-taught morality and embrace the collective values of their dialoguing classroom group.
The war against Christian values is not going to stop, and our children will remain the greatest target. The signs of complete global transformation are already closer than most people realize. We can no longer count on the American Constitution, which was based on moral and just values, as it is daily being redefined. More often than not, today’s choices are totally contrary to biblical standards that helped in creating America’s founding values.
May God show us how we can best equip our children to stand firm in Christ in the midst of the coming battles. Let us remember that our Lord still reigns! In the midst of this spiritual war, He will surely provide His strength, wisdom, and His comforting nearness to all who choose to trust and follow Him!
O our God . . . we have no might against this great company that cometh against us; neither know we what to do: but our eyes are upon Thee. (2 Chronicles 20:12)
The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust. (Psalm 18:2)
But God said: “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9)
To order copies of A “Common Core” For a Global Community, click here.
1. Tiffany Gabay, “Students Asked to ‘Argue That Jews Are Evil’ and Prove Nazi Loyalty in Assignment Linked to Common Core” (The Blaze, April 12, 2013 “http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/12/students-asked-to-argue-that-jews-are-evil-and-prove-nazi-loyalty-in-assignment-linked-to-common-core).
2. Julian Huxley—see http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/julian-huxley.htm.
3. Thomas Sowell, “Indoctrinating the Children” (Forbes, February 1, 1993), p. 65.
7. Phyllis Schlafly, “Bill Gates Teams Up With UNESCO” (Eagle Forum, November 30, 2005, http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2005/nov05/05-11-30.html).
9. Martin Erdmann, “The Spiritualization of Science, Technology and Education in a One-World Society” (European Journal of Nanomedicine, January 2009, Volume 2, http://www.clinam.org/images/stories/pdf/volume2.1.pdf), p. 31.
10. “Top Ten Scariest People in Education Reform: #5 – Bill Gates” (August 2013, http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/top-ten-scariest-people-in-education-reform-5-bill-gates).
12. John Dewey, “Religion and our Schools” (July 6, 2006. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0141620980200202#preview).
13. Dennis Laurence Cuddy, Ph.D., Chronology of Education With Quotable Quotes (Highland City, FL: Pro Family Forum, Inc., 1993), p. 18. Many of the quotes in my chronological list on pages 8-11 are from Dr. Cuddy’s Quotable Quotes book; used with permission.
14. The Humanist Manifesto 1 (1933) was the first public declaration of the views and objectives of humanism. It rejected God and His values but affirmed humanist faith in the power and evolution of man. http://americanhumanist.org/Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_I.
15. Willard Givens presented a report titled “Education for the New America” at the 72nd Annual Meeting of the NEA, held in Washington, D.C. in July 1934.
16. Joy Elmer Morgan, “The United Peoples of the World” (The Journal of the National Education Association, December 1942), p.261.
17. I.L. Kandel, “National Education in an International World” (The Journal of the National Education Association , Vol. 35, 1946), p. 191.
18. J. Elmer Morgan, “The Teacher and World Government” (The Journal of the National Education Association, January 1946), p.1.
19. Julian Huxley (Washington DC: Public Affairs Press, 1947). See http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/julian-huxley.htm.
20. Dennis Cuddy, Ph.D., “The Grab for Power: A Chronology of the NEA” (Marlborough NH: Plymouth Rock Foundation, 1993); p. 8.
21. John I. Goodlad & Associates, Curriculum Inquiry—the Study of Curriculum Practice (NY: McGraw Hill, 1979), p. 261.
22. Humanist Manifesto II, Tenet #12. http://americanhumanist.org/Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_II .
23. The NEA promotes “A Declaration of Interdependence: Education for a Global Community” (September, 1976. Cuddy, Chronology of Education, p. 59).
24. Susan Hooper, “Educator Proposes a Global ‘Core Curriculum’” (Education Week, http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1985/11/27/06110023.h05.html).
25. The Conference on “Learning for All: Bridging Domestic and International Education” with Barbara Bush (Honorary Chair) and a Russian keynote speaker, Elena Lenskaya, October 30-November 1, 1991.
26. Dennis Cuddy, Chronology of Education With Quotable Quotes, op. cit., p. 100.
27. “Moscow Declaration” Adopted by G-8: Education Ministers—Secretary Spellings Commits U.S., Eagle Forum, U.S. Dept. of Education, June 2, 2006. http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2006/june06/moscow.html.
30. Nikita Khrushchev, “Dark Predictions of a KGB Defector,” 1959 at http://frontpagemag.com/2010/10/19/dark-predictions-of-a-kgb-defector/print.
31. From a publicity flier announcing the trans-Atlantic conference held April 10-13, 1994.
33. This story was included in the first grade curriculum in New Pittsburgh, PA. The story was also told–using the new paradigm context—at a parents’ meeting explaining Character Education. Anita Hoge, formerly a Pennsylvania mother and researcher, reported the story to me.
34. At the time of her 1989 keynote speech, Shirley McCune presided over the Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory (McREL). The Regional Educational Laboratories are private, non-profit corporations which are funded, in whole or in part, under Title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
35. Spoken at a 1988 forum address at the Dallas Institute of Humanities and Culture. This address formed the nucleus for his book, Unbinding Prometheus: Education for the Coming Age.
To order copies of A “Common Core” For a Global Community, click here.
LTRP Note: Christian Parents in North America should know that as the world moves closer and closer toward a globally-run, three-legged stool (thank you Rick Warren!), one-world government, their rights to homeschool their children will evaporate. In order to bring about this “utopian” society where all is one, the God-given right to influence our children with biblical values must be removed.
By Heather Clark
Christian News Network
STOCKHOLM – Christians around the world are being asked to help plead for the release of an 11-year-old boy who was abducted by government officials because his parents chose to homeschool the child.
As previously reported, Domenic Johansson was seized by the Swedish government in 2009 as he and his parents, Christer and Annie Johansson, were boarding a plane to move to Annie’s homeland of India. He was only seven years old at the time, and social services state that they removed the child because he was being homeschooled by his parents.
The Johanssons were only allowed to see their son for one hour every five weeks. He was placed in foster care and forced to attend public school. The following year, the government cut off all parental visitations to Domenic.
In June 2012, a district court ruled that it could not ignore the fact that everyone who had testified about the Johansson’s care of Domenic proved that the family was doing just fine before the boy was removed from the home. However, the decision was later overturned on appeal and the Johanssons were again barred from seeing their son.
Since the ruling, the Johanssons have been struggling to face the reality of life without their son. The Virginia-based Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) states that the ordeal has been particularly difficult for Domenic’s mother. Click here to continue reading.
Below, a special report about the case.
“Jonas Himmelstrand (Homeschool leader in Sweden) Speaks of Domenic During this Interview”
By Charlie Butts
New York’s homosexual marriage and anti-discrimination laws are already taking a toll on Christian business owners, one of whom is currently before the state’s Human Rights Commission. Robert and Cynthia Gifford own the 100-acre Liberty Ridge Farm, a business in Schaghticoke that hosts various events for children and for adults – including weddings. Jason McGuire of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms explains the problem the Giffords face revolves around that. “Unfortunately, a lesbian couple approached them seeking to have their wedding on the property,” McGuire tells OneNewsNow. “I believe it was a setup as they recorded the phone conversation with the Giffords, and the Giffords told them no – and now the Giffords family, the farm owners, are facing a human rights law violation.” – Click here to continue reading.
By Heather Clark
Christian News Network
RICHLAND, Wash. – Attorneys for a Christian florist in Washington have asked a county court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the state attorney general, which accused her of violating Washington’s anti-discrimination law for declining to help decorate a same-sex “wedding.”
As previously reported, Baronelle Stutzman of Arlene’s Flowers in Richland was leveled with a lawsuit in March by State Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who claims that she violated the law by not fulfilling the order. Stutzman had been approached by one of her faithful customers, Robert Ingersoll, a homosexual, as he wanted her to supply the flowers for his upcoming ceremony with his partner, Curt. She states that she politely explained that she would not be able to help in regard to the event.
“I just took his hands and said, ‘I’m sorry. I cannot do your wedding because of my relationship with Jesus Christ,’” Stutzman told reporters. Click here to continue reading.
The latest news briefs from Understand the Times:
- October 7 – Fingerprint Funds Transfer
- October 14 -China state media blasts US shutdown, calls for a ‘de-Americanized’ world
- October 21 – NXT-ID files patent application for biometric wallet technology
- October 21 – Canadian Government uses Aware software for biometric visa applicant screening
- October 22 – Toward Big Hearted Ecumenism: Pope Francis Speaks to Lutheran Leaders and Shows Us the Way
- October 21 – Pope Francis’ Address to the Lutheran World Federation and Members of the Lutheran-Catholic Commission for Unity
- October 23 – Pope Francis draws non-believers to notice Gospel, cardinal says
- October 25 – Colorado parish cultivates ‘new evangelization’ spirit
By Heather Clark
Christian News Network
OLYMPIA – A Christian judge in Washington was recently reprimanded by the state Judicial Conduct Commission for refusing to officiate same-sex ‘weddings.’
Thurston County Superior Court Judge Gary Tabor had made met with court employees following last year’s election, which legalized the practice in Washington, and informed his colleagues that he did not feel comfortable with performing homosexual ceremonies. An attendee of the meeting leaked Tabor’s comments to reporters, who in turned contacted the judge for further explanation.
Tabor reiterated that he did not wish to participate due to “philosophical and religious reasons,” and advised that his decision was a personal conviction and not the official position of the court. He stated that he believed that as long as other judges were in place to officiate the ceremonies, that he could choose to decline. Judges are not required to perform weddings, but should they choose to avail their services to the public, Washington state bars justices from turning away homosexuals. Click here to continue reading.