The Anger Monster Within

Have you ever wondered, dear reader, why it is that when you buy a new car, you suddenly see that car on the road every where you go? I remember when I bought my first van, and apparently everyone else had gone out and bought one the same day.

Well, it seems I am a trend setter. You see, circumstances in our house have reached such proportions as to keep me from blogging for months. That is a long time for someone who loves to write. Circumstances I am referring to are issues within myself that have to deal with anger management.

I am not an angry person. For those of you who know me personally, you know that I am a fairly easy going person with a pretty cool head. But for some reason, there has been a monster sleeping within me that seems to come alive. It also seems to have a propensity to enjoy engulfing small children.

It seems that the only people on this earth that are able to wake this monster within are my own lovable monkeys. They don't mean to do it, I just think they like to play with the monster, so they ask it to come out and play. The only problem is that they don't ever seem to remember that this monster does not play nice.

So what does this have to do with new cars? Well, as I was praying for God to make this monster move away, I started noticing advertisements for webinars, books, DVDs, and tapes dealing with parental anger. Did you know, up to 50% of homeschooling moms describe similar symptoms of anger and rage coming out in their everyday lives? Even those like me who tend to be level headed people most of the time.

Weird! It's like God was trying to tell me something!

So, how has it been? Well, actually, it's been pretty good around here. The monster comes out to play less often. It still thrives on the anger my children seem to give it, but it comes out less and less, and thanks to me (and my trend setting abilities), now you too can have help when you need it.

The website I have found to be the most helpful has been the National Center for Biblical Parenting. They even have "Parenting University" an online seminar you can watch and learn in 5 minute segments.

The Coolest Hallelujah Chorus Ever

You watered what?

Sometimes as a homeschooling parent, I find that my children have learned lessons that I didn't even think had gotten through.

None of my children have really taken to gardening. Sure they enjoyed the planting of the seed and liked the idea of eating something from the garden, but as the heat index goes up, down goes their enthusiasm. So, unless I push through and weed myself, we don't usually end up with much at harvest time. Most goes to the rabbits and chipmunks.

Well, the other day, "Ladybug" very excitedly told me she watered her garden.

Garden? What garden?

Well, she dragged me up to my room and pointed to my bed. "Look, Mommy! I even watered the seed!"

Well, my worst fears were confirmed when I looked, and indeed, she had taken an acorn from the front yard and "planted it" on my nice white down comforter.

And she had indeed "watered" the acorn. Three times from what she told me...

Sigh.

Oh well, off to the dry cleaners with that. At least it's warm enough now to do without for a couple of days.

At least she learned her gardening lesson.

Right?

1 Corinthians 13 for Homeschoolers

(Copied by permission)

If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and teach my children Latin conjugations, Chinese and Portuguese, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal, and no matter what I say, they will not hear me. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know my children’s bents and God’s plan for their lives, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and am the keeper of the teacher’s editions and solutions manuals, and if I have all faith, so as to move mountains, and even keep up with my giant piles of laundry and dishes, but do not have love, I am nothing, even if all the people at church think I’m Supermom. And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and my formal dining room gets turned into a schoolroom and our family vacations look more like educational field trips, and if I surrender my body to be burned, never having time to get my nails done, put makeup on or even take a bath, but do not have love, it profits me nothing, because all my family cares about is the expression on my face, anyway.

Love is patient with the child who still can’t get double-digit subtraction with borrowing, and kind to the one who hasn’t turned in his research paper. It is not jealous of moms with more, fewer, neater, more self-directed, better-behaved or smarter children. Love does not brag about homemade bread, book lists, or scholarships and is not arrogant about her lifestyle or curriculum choices. It does not act unbecomingly or correct the children in front of their friends. It does not seek its own, trying to squeeze in alone time when someone still needs help; it is not provoked when interrupted for the nineteenth time by a child, the phone, the doorbell or the dog; does not take into account a wrong suffered, even when no one compliments the dinner that took hours to make or the house that took so long to clean.

Love does not rejoice in unrighteousness or pointing out everyone else’s flaws, but rejoices with the truth and with every small step her children take in becoming more like Jesus, knowing it’s only by the grace of God when that occurs.

Love bears all things even while running on no sleep; believes all things, especially God’s promise to indwell and empower her; hopes all things, such as that she’ll actually complete the English curriculum this year and the kids will eventually graduate; endures all things, even questioning from strangers, worried relatives, and most of all, herself."Love never fails. And neither will she. As long as she never, never, never gives up.

Misty Krasawski is the overly-blessed mom of eight children whom she homeschools in sunshine-y Florida. She has been clinging ferociously to the hand of her Lord since she was knee-high to a grasshopper, homeschooling for the past thirteen years, and has eighteen more years ahead of her with the children who are glad she will have done most of her experimenting on those who went before. Her wonderful husband Rob has much treasure laid up for him in heaven for having been called to such a daunting task. After the house goes to sleep she can sometimes be found gathering her thoughts at http://www.homeschoolblogger.com/MistyKrasawski.

"Miss Me Yet?"

Here is an interesting billboard that has been popping up all over the internet and news media.

Made me laugh so hard I almost fell off my chair.

You see, dear reader, I am a complete "W" fan. Yes, I admit it. I am one of a few (seemingly) people that believed that President Bush was a good man who lead our country through a very difficult time.

No other President in history had to deal with what he did. He lead this country like he cared about it. He never apologized for his actions, he did what he thought needed to be done.

He never (and still doesn't) defend his decisions to the media, who hated him. The main stream media, and even some conservative talk shows ripped him to shreds and he never defended himself. I wish he had.

The secret is that he doesn't care what the media thinks of him. They called him stupid. He didn't stand up and say that you can't fly a fighter jet if you're stupid. They called him a "red neck". He said, "Yup!" They said he was hell bent on a personal vendetta. He didn't bother to answer.

Was he perfect? No. He never claimed to be. Did he make some wrong judgments? Yes, I think he did say that. But his intent was never a personal agenda. And he NEVER got mad about people disagreeing with him, like other people we know. Here is the link to the story of the billboard, I think it's worth a read.

The Parental Rights Amendment

This is a copy of Parental Rights.org talking points memo stating the reason for the Parental Amendment that is going through Congress as we speak. You can go to their web site and find out whether or not your Congressmen are cosigners of the bill. There are several cosigners in the house, but not very many in the senate.

The proposed Parental Rights Amendment will preserve the time-honored principles of parental rights in the actual text of the Constitution, just as the Bill of Rights preserves other fundamental rights.

Section One: The liberty of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children is a fundamental right. Section one is rooted in several Supreme Court cases, and without exception:

• Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) – “It is the natural duty of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life.”
• Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925) – “The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”
• Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1944) – “It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder.”
• Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) – “The values of parental direction of the religious upbringing and education of their children in their early and formative years have a high place in our society…. The primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.”
• Moore v. East Cleveland (1977) – “Our decisions establish that the Constitution protects the sanctity of the family precisely because the institution of the family is deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition. It is through the family that we inculcate and pass down many of our most cherished values, moral and cultural.”
• Santosky v. Kramer (1982) – “The fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child does not evaporate simply because they have not been model parents or have lost temporary custody of their child to the State” (emphasis added).
• Washington v. Glucksburg (1997) – “In a long line of cases, we have held that, in addition to the specific freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights, the “liberty” specially protected by the Due Process Clause includes the rights…to direct the education and upbringing of one’s children.”
• Troxel v. Granville (2000) – “[T]he interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court….In light of this extensive precedent, it cannot be doubted that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions regarding the care, custody, and control of their children.”

Section Two: Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served. Section two is similarly established by the Supreme Court:

• Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) – “[T]he essence of all that has been said and written on the subject is that only those interests of the highest order and those not otherwise served can overbalance legitimate claims to the free exercise of religion” [i.e., a fundamental right].
• Quilloin v. Walcott (1978) – “We have little doubt that the Due Process Clause would be offended if a State were to attempt to force the breakup of a natural family, over the objections of the parents and their children, without some showing of unfitness and for the sole reason that to do so was thought to be in the children’s best interest.”
• Parham v. J.R. (1979) – “[H]istorically, it has been recognized that the natural bonds of affection lead parents to act in the best interests of their children…. The statist notion that governmental power should supersede parental authority in all cases because some parents abuse and neglect children is repugnant to American tradition.”
• Santosky v. Kramer (1982) – “Until the State proves parental unfitness, the child and his parents share a vital interest in preventing erroneous termination of their natural relationship.”
• Washington v. Glucksburg (1997) – “The Fourteenth Amendment forbids the government to infringe…’fundamental’ liberty interests of all, no matter what process is provided, unless the infringement is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.”
• Gonzalez v. O Centro Espirito Benficiente Uniao do Vegetal (2006) – “The government must “demonstrate that the compelling interest test is satisfied through application of the challenged law ‘to the person’ – the particular claimant whose sincere exercise of [a fundamental right] is being substantially burdened.”

These sections simply restate the Supreme Court’s long-standing rules on the constitutional, fundamental rights of parents.

Section Three: No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

• Geofroy v. Riggs (1890) – “The treaty power, as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or its departments, and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States.”
• Reid v. Covert (1957) – “To the extent that the United States can validly make treaties, the people and the States have delegated their power to the National Government and the Tenth Amendment is no barrier.” It was not the intent of the writers of our Constitution that domestic law be passed under the treaty power.

Section Three of the proposed Parental Rights Amendment merely protects parents and the States from unintended consequences arising from Article VI as it stands in today’s international world.

The proposed Parental Rights Amendment will preserve the time-honored principles of parental rights in the actual text of the Constitution, just as the Bill of Rights preserves other fundamental rights.

Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s traditional standard that parental rights
are a fundamental constitutional right?

Do you agree that it is valid to put into the text of the Constitution those rights
that run the risk of being eroded in the near future?

Do you agree it will be wiser to protect parental rights in the early stages of erosion than to wait until they’re “on the brink”? We cannot afford to wait until parental rights are being violated on a wide scale before we protect them. We must exercise the foresight of our forefathers by protecting these rights and our sovereignty now!

This is exactly the reasoning and wisdom behind the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in 1791. Today,
parental rights are at risk as well.

Domestic concerns:
In Troxel v. Granville (2000), the Supreme Court issued a fragmented six-way decision in which
only Justice Thomas used the “strict scrutiny” test to reach his decision. Justice Scalia held that because parental rights are ‘implied rights,’ they are not afforded judicial protection at all.
In the wake of this confusion, lower courts routinely fail to accord to parental rights the same high legal standard applied to other fundamental rights. There exists the real possibility that the next parental rights case to reach the Supreme Court could result in a decision even further removed from our heritage of protecting these liberties.

International concerns:
If ratified, the proposed UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) would override all state
law in the area of family law, based on Article VI of our Constitution (the Supremacy Clause).
Since nearly all U.S. family law is state law, this would constitute a massive power shift from
the state to the federal level, ultimately under the authority of a U.N. committee. More importantly, the entire tradition of fundamental rights outlined above would be over-turned
for a system where government is obligated to interfere in any family decision in order to ensure
“the best interest of the child.” ‘Implied rights,’ such as those found to be implied in the Fourteenth Amendment, would not hold up to a ratified treaty. (“The treaty power, as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or its departments, and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States.” – Geofroy v. Riggs (1890), emphasis added.) Even if this treaty is defeated now, it or another like it can be brought up at any time for ratification. Only Section Three of the proposed Amendment permanently removes this threat to fundamental parental rights. Many judges in federal and state courts already cite “customary international law” to justify applying international standards to domestic cases. This allows our nation to be bound by the CRC even if we don’t ratify it.

“Liberty once lost is lost forever.” -President John Adams

The Birthday Queen

Tuesday I am the birthday Queen.

It only happens once a year, and I indulge every moment of it. The biggest difference this year is that I am going to be 39.

Yes, dear reader, I am entering into my last year of childhood. I am told that next year I am expected to grow up. Be an adult. Live responsibly, etc. etc. etc.

So, since I have one year of youth left in me, I've made a list of things to accomplish this year, and you can keep track of my progress.

1. I will run in (and finish) at least one 5K race this year.

2. I will learn how to Kayak, and take Brian (and maybe some others) out to a lake.

3. I will go camping this year with at least one of my children (don't promise all of them).

4. I will attempt to keep at least one room clean in my house for an entire month (may not hold me to this).

5. I will hit my goal weight (8 more pounds to go) and stay there until my next birthday (and beyond). I'm going to get my skinny picture soon....

Ok, that's enough. There are many other things I WANT to do, such as take a trip with the kids along the eastern seaboard, Creation Museum, National Parks, but I think this is the most do-able for the moment.

Just wait until I hit 40. Watch out world......