It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by warrenb
Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government's coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care and development.
It's outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading "home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children." The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.
The bill says that the government agents, "well-trained and competent staff," would "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains ... modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices," and "skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development."
Are you kidding me?! With whose parental principles and values? Their own? Certain experts'? From what field and theory of childhood development? As if there are one-size-fits-all parenting techniques! Do we really believe they would contextualize and personalize every form of parenting in their education, or would they merely universally indoctrinate with their own?
Are we to assume the state's mediators would understand every parent's social or religious core values on parenting? Or would they teach some secular-progressive and religiously neutered version of parental values and wisdom? And if they were to consult and coach those who expect babies, would they ever decide circumstances to be not beneficial for the children and encourage abortions?
One government rebuttal is that this program would be "voluntary." Is that right? Does that imply that this agency would just sit back passively until some parent needing parenting skills said, "I don't think I'll call my parents, priest or friends or read a plethora of books, but I'll go down to the local government offices"? To the contrary, the bill points to specific targeted groups and problems, on Page 840: The state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families."
Are we further to conclude by those words that low-income families know less about parenting? Are middle- and upper-class parents really better parents? Less neglectful of their children? Less needful of parental help and training? Is this "prioritized" training not a biased, discriminatory and even prejudicial stereotype and generalization that has no place in federal government, law or practice?
Bottom line: Is all this what you want or expect in a universal health care bill being rushed through Congress? Do you want government agents coming into your home and telling you how to parent your children? When did government health care turn into government child care?
Another dirty little gem in the health bill, home visits that usurp parental rights.
Wow, will the surprises ever end?
Do you see why it is important to read all legislation before passing it into law?
Chuck Norris hit it on the head, this is bad very bad.
[edit on 11-8-2009 by warrenb]
Originally posted by jeffsmathers
This program is voluntary .... Just as the paying taxes is voluntary
Originally posted by NoArmsJames
When I want some awesome '80s action and adventure I turn to Chuck Norris. When I want some cheesy '90s TV action I turn to Chuck Norris.
When I want to see what's in a bill I read said bill and come to my own conclusions. What I don't do is turn to Chuck Norris to interpret that bill for me, and then spread his interpretation as fact.
I am reminded of a statement made 60 years ago by Paul Henri-Spaak (1899-1972), the former Prime Minister of Belgium, the first Chairman of the General Assembly of the United Nations (1945), and one
of the key founders of the movement toward European unity. He said: “We
do not want another committee. We have too many already. What we want
is a man of sufficient stature to hold the allegiance of all people, and to lift us out of the economic morass in which we are sinking. Send us such a man and, be he God or the devil, we will receive him.
Originally posted by Jesus H Christ
I am almost of the mindset that you should have to get a licence before having a child. Why not? You have to have one for every other damned thing in this country.
Originally posted by Jesus H Christ
Society! As a whole we all colectively set the paramiters for what we will consider "the norm". "Good" "Bad" "Evil" etc.
Originally posted by rcwj75
Hell these days people CAN'T afford to keep themselves fed, clothed, or healthy, yet they will have kids KNOWING our government will hand them anything they need.