Everyone else has brought up the obvious--you shouldn't have kids if you don't want them.

The thing that's bugging me (assuming that the LW is reporting correctly) is that your husband is looking to have kids because he wants to infuse his life with meaning.

Take what I say next with a grain of salt, as I'm childfree. But it seems to me that having kids because you think your life is empty and meaningless isn't a good idea. It places such a burden on the kids and on parenting to be this life-fulfilling thing, to be grander and better and more than parenting is.

Parenting is full of wonder and love and small moments. It's more frequently full of tantrums and dirty diapers and endless viewings of Shrek and hard labor, and then the teen years. It just seems unfair to your kids to romanticize parenting as this thing that will give your life Meaning. They can't live up to that. You can't live up to that.

And at the end of the day, your kids will grow up and leave and you'll still be left with your own life, empty again if you've infused all your purpose and meaning into your kids and left none for yourself.

NCLB is useless, and has been from the start, especially with its punitive stance towards schools that are already failing, especially with the idea that filling in the right bubbles is more important than phys ed, music, arts, or learning to think critically.

The problem is, Congress and far, far, far too many people expect a "quick fix" to our public education.

There is no quick fix.

Schools tend to reflect the problems within a community, so if your students and their parents are poor and living in fear and don't value education and can't see a better life, your school will reflect that. It doesn't have to be the case, but it takes an enormous amount of will and funding to turn a school into part of a solution for the community.

The contributing problem is that we as a society like to give lip service to how much we value education, but we really don't. Our spending belies it; we spend an obscene amount more per year on the military than we do on education. Communities would rather see their schools crumble, or their students crammed 40+ to a room, rather than pass a damn bond initiative to pay for a new school.

There's a strong anti-intellectual streak in America that leads to people being proud of their own ignorance; that leads people to poo-poo it when their children try to educate themselves; that has led to the cultural trope--and the real life commonalities--of the nerdy bookworm getting bullied by the popular jock.

We don't need more standardized tests. We need a cultural attitude adjustment. Maybe when we value education more than brute force, we'll finally come up with some solutions.

LW-

Unlike the vast majority of posters here today, I don't mind a heaping of violence with my movies. I cringed at parts of Pan's Labyrinth, but I'd see that movie again.

And I think you're well within your rights, and your family is acting like a bunch of jerks.

Where is the TV in your house? Can it be moved so that you can have part of the house to use while they watch their movies? (E.g., put it in the basement, or in living area with doors that shut, so you can use the kitchen or another living area.) Is TV watching the main activity in your home? If so, can you schedule a time or two a week where family interaction doesn't revolve around it?

And before trying to rein in the kids, make sure your husband is on your side on this. I can't believe he's joining in on the teasing, if he knows your history.

Okay, Mr. Wingnut, how about my situation.

I have a job that provides excellent health insurance. I recently had a PAP smear, and the results were "abnormal." I'm currently waiting (yes, waiting!) to see a doctor for a follow-up.

Assuming the worst, and it turns out to be cancer or HPV, I can pretty much never, ever, ever leave my job (which I dislike) if I want to have health insurance again. If the worst is true, I will have a pre-existing condition (either cancer or a virus that can cause cancer), thus rendering me virtually uninsurable. I'm 27.

So a system that would trap me (or someone you love) into a job I dislike for the next 40 years of my life, assuming I don't get fired or laid off or the company doesn't cease to exist, is a system that's working?

A system that leaves the population in terror of not having health insurance, a system that bankrupts people even if they do have health insurance, a system that kills people because they don't have insurance, that system is one that works?

I'd be interested to read an article that deals with those realities, and why Wingnuttia still thinks that "socialized" medicine is the Great Satan.