Yes, lots of people choose from varied backgrounds and creeds to homeschool their kids for a wide varity of reasons, in a variety of ways.

I suspect graduates of the SBTC housewife program will not have various reasons or various methods. These home-schooled children's "education" will be very limited. In no small part because their teachers' education (Mom) will be painfully limited. (Note: I will put " " around the word Christian because I know true Christianity is not being represented below.)

What won't get taught?

-sex ed beyond abstinence-only

-evolution (and therefore, large areas of biology, genetics and physiology)

-the scientific method

-most science that challenges a narrowly-defined "Christian" teaching

-history that doesn't support Biblical history

-literature that is "profane" "immoral" or "dirty"

-sociology that does't fit the "Christian" mode of thinking (and therefore most foreign languages, comparative religious studies, anthropology, etc)

Beyond subject matter, what won't be taught?

-critical thinking

-natural curiosity

-a love of difference, of discovering the unknown, of challenging assumptions

In short, "Christian" madrassas

Exactly what we need in America.

And these kids will be reaching adulthood as I might be getting ready to retire. Eeek.

I can see a "home-making curriculum" being very useful to a large number of college students, of both sexes, in a secular context. Here's what I'd envision:

-Courses that teach budget management, tax prep, investment basics, retirement planning, understanding insurance options, how to save for and understand a mortgage, and planning college savings for one's own children.

-Courses that cover basic home and auto maintenance (How can you make your home energy effecient? What should you have on hand in case of an emergency?)

-Classes on meal planning (nutrition, eating local/organic, how to garden, etc), classes on basic sewing and garment repair (why spend $20 when you can hem your pants yourself?).

-Classes on becoming inbolved in one's community, local government, or volunteer activities.

-Courses in interpersonal communication, between spouse/partners, including conflict management, anger management and recognizing/preventing domestic abuse.

-Courses in parenting skills, particularly child psych development, and conflict management (how to get your kids to behave without losing your mind). (And, yeah, I'd include a lecture on the importance of breast feeding, in public or at home, and pumping at work. Hee hee!).

Think *any* of the above are being taught at SBTC? Me neither.

Yeah. I just Googled "open-heart surgery" and saw some pretty neat video.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/lcs/heart.htm

But, I'd rather my surgeon had some classtime under her belt.

When you simply read something on your own, unless you are motivated to pay careful attention, you seldom retain details and nuances. I've read up on how to play poker several times. But when my husband's family gets the cards out, I'm never prepared.

When you read something for a class (a good class), you not only read material, but reflect on it, question it, discuss it, and learn more from it.

I agree with you 100%. It is a way for fundies to have their cake and eat it too, with respect to female education.

It counters femenist principles in 2 ways:

1. the separate sphere mentality you describe, training women to be fit solely as mothers and wives

and

2. taking women out of the home to learn to be fit to serve ... in the home. As Mizbinkley pointed out, are wives and mothers designing and teaching these courses? Would graduates of this program be deemed fit to teach? My guess is no and no. So, the mom at home isn't to be relied upon as a teacher, you must go to school to learn ... how to be a teacher in the home.

I'm getting dizzy.

I looked athe their curriculum, and even the course titles sound scary.

"The Value of a Child" 3 (credits): I picture an ntire semester devoted to anti-birthcontrol, anti-abortion, anti-daycare screeds.

There is 3-credit course (with lab) in "Apparel making." Which, I'm sorry, is ludicrous. I make clothes for a living (I'm a theatrical costume designer) and garment-making is full-time work if you want to clothe your family "from scratch." It ciosts more, in materials alone, not even counting labor and energy, to make your own clothes than it does to buy tshirts and jeans at Target. While I think ing is a valuable skill, I don't think it's particularly useful for a modern household, ven if you are ultra-fundie. (Even the Amish have a mail order catalog),

The only truly practical course I see in the entire program is the nutrition course and the meal-prep lab. I still remember many pribnciples and "fun facts" from my food science course in undergrad.

If SBTC added a course in music appreciation and flower painting, girls could receive a pretty decent 18th century education from this program. You've come a long way, baby.

That logic is so tortured I need to stand on my head to look at it. If prostitution is illegal, how could one be "robbed" of the service? If someone steals my illegal (hypothetical, eavesdropping Justice Depratment! Ther's no actual weed here!) weed, I can't file a theft report.

If the prostitute had been raped at gunpoint when she was "off the clock" so to speak, would the case still have been thrown out? Is a prostitute always for sale, and therefore not entitled to say "no" to any potential client?

Even if one can buy that explanation (and swallow their bile while doing so), 3 of the 4 guys who raped her (after the conensual1st client) did not have a "verbal contract" with her. If Friend #1 of Original John was a thief, weren't Friends 2, 3 and 4 still rapists?

Well, that judge sure made her point. Prostitutes don't deserve the protection of the law. I wonder if that applies to all criminals? Prison could get a whole lot more interesting if we just admit we tell wrong-doers "You're screwed from here on out."

Three posts to completly trollify the blog tonight.

Well done, anonymous.

Now, please let the adults talk?