According to the website, "Homemaking" is considered a concentration under the Humanities major. Other concentrations include the "History of Ideas," Education and Music. Those at least make sense to me in the context of the school. But Homemaking? And it requires 23 hours whereas the others require 15. If this were really about homeschooling, they would've added a homemaking class to the Education concentration.

No, this is all about, as the course listing admits, "preparing women to model the characteristics of a Godly woman as outlined in Scripture."

Way to discredit yourself as an academic institution even among your believers. If you're looking to marginalize yourselves further as total regressive kooks, mission accomplished.

http://college.swbts.edu/academics/degree.cfm?id=19

Some parents opt for homeschooling because they can't afford private school. Maybe their local public school is crappy. Maybe it's a fine school but they just know their kid.

Eg. the kid is a bit of a misfit--not a bad kid, just a little different socially. The kind of kid who'd be fine in a smaller school environment but wouldn't fare well in a jumbo public school. Or the kid needs more one-on-one attention to thrive intellectually. Maybe the kid is autistic or borderline autistic.

There are lots of reasons to homeschool, and for some kids it's the best available option. And the best homeschooling parents are the ones who aren't trying to hide the real world from their kid but, rather, creating a situation for the child to thrive and still have outside interaction. There's a growing secular homeschooling movement in this country.

Actually, Bush usually invites the Nobel winners to the White House for a hand-shake photo op (but often not until November or December).

Holy crap, I can't wait to see that picture.

Please, please, please...

Hey, are you the infamous, rapid-posting, anonymous Bushie? Taking Deluded Salon Liberals (TM) down a peg one posting at a time?

I'd heard of such an entity but thought it was just a myth. Like Loch Ness, Bigfoot or Bat Boy.

As you were...

One has to be taught "good-Googling." What are good sites to reference to find reliable information? Good teachers show you how to research effectively on the web.

Anyway, less on homeschooling in general and back to the article. The irony of the Homemaking concentration is that you can't go back to the institute where you earned your degree and teach it.

Who's teaching the classes and designing the curricula? And who taught them? Can only women teach the classes, but they cannot design the curricula? So none of the teachers are actually "experts" in the field because they're out teaching and not at home? Maybe homemakers are allowed to teach in school if they're infertile or have reached menopause.

It reminds of that religious group (the Shakers?) who died out because they believed in celibacy. This seems like a population that will destroy itself if it continues down this path.

debpet writes, "EVERY politician is calculating! ...I have a hard time understanding why Hillary is singled out about this to the extent that she is."

I really think it's because she's an ambitious woman. She's shrewd and ready for a fight. For a man, say, Rudy Giuliani, that's just leadership. For a woman, it's something more sinister.

Barack Obama has run a pretty underwhelming campaign thus far. He doesn't seem to have the stomach for it. Still too much of a consensus builder, which is good for governing but not so useful for differentiating yourself during the primaries.

He's starting to show a little more teeth now, but I think he waited too long. He's been branded (his doing) as Mr. Above-the-Fray. So now, at any attack he makes, he gets slapped down. He hasn't earned his campaigning chops yet. Perhaps next time around (he's got a long and great career ahead of him) he'll be ready.

I really liked John Harwood's response to the whole Ron Paul issue. It reads, in part,

Could Ron Paul's $5-million third quarter be the start of something? Sure. And it's important to remember that "something" need not be winning the election. To the extent that progress by a candidate with Paul's views--on Iraq, monetary policy and other issues--reflects a churn within a Republican Party better known for orthodoxy, that counts, too. The end point of a successful presidential campaign need not be 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Will Ron Paul win the Republican nomination? Unlikely. But I think he's an important part of the debate. The media has been calling this race way too soon and whittling down the candidates before anyone's even voted. We're an information culture. We can keep the names of more than three candidates in our heads (thank you very much, MSM), even if you can't.

Aside: Ron Paul's notable facts according to CNBC include "has delivered some 4,000 babies." I wonder if this means they have to vote for him.

Gee, Ron Paul makes his "paulites" drive to the events and pay for admission themselves, yet still he wins!

Actually, Paulites are smart enough to get bussed in on Romney's dime. And then they vote for Paul.