Comments on: Can Homeschooling Improve Marriage?

By: LM

LM — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 02:20:34 +0000

Along the same lines, the Washington Post ran an article about the benefits of marrying young & not spending your 20s… well, not wasting your 20s (or 30s or 40s!) The article is here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/24/AR2009042402122.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

(When secular authors pick up on what I’ve heard from many wise women for so long – it’s very gratifying, but funny in a way. God’s plans are SO much better than man’s!)

By: wordwarrior

wordwarrior — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:34:22 +0000

Louise,

LOL! Why are you here again? If my children were impaired, I think I’d know it by now. If the hundreds of homeschooled children I know who are grown (in various stages of life–college, married with their own children, businessmen, etc.) were impaired, I think we’d know.

Either you’ve never really known anyone who homeschooled, or you just enjoy picking fights.

Not interested

When it works, there’s no arguing against it. It’s as if you were to tell me that the sun really doesn’t rise each day–nothing you can say convinces me of a fact that I see

Better spend your time arguing elsewhere!

By: Louise

Louise — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:08:20 +0000

of course you don’t want to post anything the could possibly be correct. Well I know you read it, I could care less whether anyone else did. Cause when your kids end up impaired you’ll have that one comment left in your conscience.

By: Lori

Lori — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:43:24 +0000

And yet, Bethany’s explanations stand alone. Well said, and thanks.

By: Bethany Hudson

Bethany Hudson — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 21:09:19 +0000

back at you, Kelly.

By: Word Warrior

Word Warrior — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:49:34 +0000

Bethany,

I’m sorry–I deleted the last comment before I saw your rebuttle. I deleted it because, well, nevermind

By: Bethany Hudson

Bethany Hudson — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:59:14 +0000

Louise – I agree with you that (at a certain age) it is appropriate and important to discuss the facts of life with our children (at that point, they are probably young adults). But I disagree completely that expecting your children to remain pure until marriage is a form of repression. I fully expect my children not to do drugs (neither my husband nor I ever did, nor did most of our close friends). Even though “experimentation” is the norm, and even though I will inform my children at the appropriate time about the effects of drug use, I will NOT permit them to indulge in that sort of behavior under my roof. Once they are grown and out of my house, of course, I have little recourse except prayer if they choose to go against my advice and wishes. But, while they are in our home, they will behave as members of our family are expected to behave. I don’t want to repress them but it is my sacred duty to protect them. Just because I homeschool my children does not mean that I am shielding them completely from the world. We have family members and close friends who have premarital sex, are unwed parents, have used drugs, curse like sailors, do not attend church, etc., etc. None of these are appropriate courses of action in our household, but certainly our children will be exposed to them, because we do not believe in shutting out friends and family members because their behavior does not align with ours. However, we will speak with our children about the fact that they are not to engage in such behavior and WHY (because it is destructive to their well-being and most importantly, because it is destructive to their relationship with God).

Lastly, on a purely factual matter: your assertion that STDs and teen pregnancy are a result of oppression or denial of information to children is inaccurate. While teen pregnancy is down (actually due to a rise in oral sex and a simultaneous drop is conventional sex, rather than to sexual education), STDs are still very much on the rise, despite all the “education” children today receive on such matters. Promoting purity in families (which I would not consider oppressive by any means) is not the cause of these things or even a prime factor. Every single person I have known with an unwed pregnancy or an STD has come from a family that did NOT promote purity, educated their children on the uses of contraception, and permitted premarital sex. The facts just don’t jive.

I do respect your opinions; they are, of course, ones I have heard many times. And I really do support the sort of open communication you seem to be promoting. But, there is a difference between open communication with our children and laissez-faire permissiveness of what God has clearly told us is sin–and what He clearly tells us as parents must be a matter of discipleship in our homes.

Certainly, when Kelly speaks of surrounding her children with like-minded teens, she is not saying “at the expense of them ever knowing any person who isn’t this way”. Think about it logically: if you wanted your child to succeed as a musician, you would surround him with experiences and people who would help him to achieve those goals. If you wanted your children to not play with guns, you wouldn’t drop them off, unattended at a rifle range. If you wanted your child to eat more heathfully, you wouldn’t stock the pantry with ho-hos and twinkies. As parents, we are responsible for providing nurturing environments for our children; the company we expose them to is a part of that environment, and any child development specialist will tell you that environment has a huge impact on the future choices of children.

~Bethany

By: kenbrandy

kenbrandy — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:03:01 +0000

The disease metaphor is right on, as it’s actually true that you are protecting them from actual diseases. I read recently that having “just” 2 partners in your life means that you have been exposed to all sorts of dieases.

By: Tina

Tina — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:04:35 +0000

Great post (as normal).
Wonderful thoughts. My husband and I also want to protect our girls from the mindset that we had as “teenagers” – open their minds to see beyond the cultural norm. I’ve told them that they are so blessed to know that there’s a better way to do things. (When I was their ages, I thought I was supposed to start dating at 16 – kissing earlier. That it was good to have boyfriends – made you special, etc. It’s not what my parents told me – but it’s what culture expected and I never heard that there was another way. I was so inside the box that I didn’t even know there was a box.)
I’m so thankful that, in so many ways, our kids are looking to the Bible rather than culture to make their decisions.
God is so good!!!!
Thanks again for your blog. I look forward to reading your posts.

By: Kelly L

Kelly L — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:09:08 +0000

We homeschool our only child, and we too are partly doing it to protect her from what we engaged in. She just turned 9 and knows that God has the right one for her. She will not date, nor does she want to. We have not found like minded peple yet. Although when I tell friends why we won’t let our girl participate in recreational dating, it peaks their interest; so maybe we will soon? ;}. But I am not worried about it because I am not in charge of who my daughter marries: God is. To assume that I have to surround her with future husband possibilities is saying I know who she is to marry. God has already picked her husband and He knows exactly how to put them in the same local at the right time. BTW: I am not saying anything negative about those blessed enough to have that kind of support around them in various families. Only saying this to encourage those who don’t.
Kelly, please continue to encourage those of us who are “out there” on these types of decisions and encourage those who are not yet there to be challenged and to seek the Lord. I know the Lord has set you up for this ministry. Awesome Job. Sorry for length.