Other Freauf Articles:
IS "THE GIVER" ON YOUR HORIZON?
By Betty Freauf
June 5, 2003
In the book Target: America's Children, it says the United States Communist party as early as 1932 wanted a federal Department of Education. A 1963 Congressional Record showed the 17th goal of the 45 communist goals was to get control of the schools and use them as transmission belts for socialism and current communist propaganda. They also wanted to get control of the teachers associations and put the Communist party line into textbooks.
Federal government control over education began in earnest during the Eisenhower administration after the Soviet Union launched Sputnik but the federal Department of Education was not actually created until 1980 by Democrat President Jimmy Carter and his Democrat colleagues in Congress making good on their pledge to the National Education Association. Since the creation of that unconstitutional department, we have seen a gradual decline in academics.
When Oregon passed its Outcome- Based/Pavlov/Mastery learning education bill (HB 3565) in 1991, one Democrat told the exuberant Republicans, who rose to their feet in the respective legislative chambers to support this invasive legislation, that he felt we were simply rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. And then he voted for it. Go figure. Another bill also passed that year was HB 3474 known as the Planned Workforce Development bill.
Call me a cynic, but could the "nurturing centers" in the story, "Serving A Greater Whole" in the book, The Giver, which can be found in public schools and even some Christian schools, be the "Family Resource Centers" provided in HB 3565? Other states have Family Resource Centers too. In that book there was a Committee of Elders making decisions for the community. Could that be the Planned Workforce rulers who dictate what jobs will be required for the multinational corporations in the "planned economy" being proposed and how the children will be trained for these jobs like Pavlov's salivating dogs?
"The Giver", which received the 1994 Newberry Award, told about a special community where every child felt safe, ate plenty of food, took pills to stop any pain and lived in a family no larger than four. Overpopulation was no problem since new babies were limited to 50 a year and non-productive people such as the severally handicapped or the elderly were simply expected to voluntarily check out! Today, animals are placed on a higher pedestal than humans!!
Can you imagine the trauma that book might cause in a young child if they had a handicapped sibling or an elderly grandparent with a stroke? (Oregon voters passed the first euthanasia law in the U.S. in 1994. On the 5/31/2003 there was a story on T.V. about the Australian who has built a suicide machine which will cost $100 in America) Read my article [Are We Destined For Selective Reduction?]
Why would such a book, which glamorizes death and the occult, be read to children as young as third graders? Book selection committees, perhaps without even reading The Giver, may have erroneously assumed because it received the prestigious Newberry Award, it would be safe. A grade school near my home bragged in their newspaper sent to all residents in the district that students in several classes were beginning a Newberry Unit.
Schools teach death education classes, take children to mortuaries and then wring their hands when teenagers commit suicide. Schools teach sex education, hand out condoms and sneak pregnant teenage girls to an abortion clinic without parental consent to kill again. Schools hand out mind-altering drugs such as Ritalin and then wonder why young people take guns and kill.
And then groups like the misnamed Children First of Oregon and its affiliates have Utopian dreams of every child being safe with shelter and plenty of food. Does this goal sound familiar? Ann Herzer, a longtime and dedicated education researcher said in the April 28, 1994 Wisconsin Report, "Russians took their children to the Soviet Union to be indoctrinated and programmed. They always take our children first."
In addition to the Family Resource Centers, well-meaning, but totally deceived paid social workers, family support workers and/or volunteers will be coming right into your home to "bond" with the first-time vulnerable parents. The goal of these "do-gooders" is (1) Teacher (2) Home visitor/friend, adviser & advocate (3) monitor. We've got cameras on our streets but no surveillance in the homes. Will these govt. workers be the in home surveillance? Unless our T.V. sets are being used for such surveillance as some suggest.
One letter to the editor in our local paper in July 1997 written by a feminist with one of those hyphenated last names suggested sending a registered nurse or other trained professional into the home of the new baby to assess not only the health of both the mother and the baby but also the home environment in general. The question is, the writer asked, "Who would provide and pay for this service?"
Oregon's former Democrat Governor John Kitzhaber said in July 2001 after the Oregon legislature adjourned that "the GOP gave him nearly everything he wanted during the 2001 session, including a new program, Oregon's Children's Plan, to screen first-born children for medical and social problems." Kitzhaber, a hospital emergency physician, is of the belief that six out of 10 children are endangered by their parents. Bingo! The taxpayers under Kitzhaber's 2001 Children's Plan will pay. Nothing happens by accident in government.
Many of these ideas were birthed as early as June 1986 at a conference entitled "Oregon's Agenda for the 1990s: Children, Youth and Families, where Norma Paulus, who was running for governor, was a guest speaker. In fact, these ideas may have even originated under Democrat Governor Robert W. Straub's 1976 Early Childhood Development Task Force created by his Executive Order 76-7. The Honorable Norma Paulus was a member of that 23-member Task Force. For more information on the June 1986 conference, see: [Oregon's agenda For The 1990s: Children, Youth and Families]
Home School parents, on the other hand, oppose Kitzhaber's Children's Plan for obvious reasons. Oregon Republican Gary George said in a T.V. interview that the Department of Health and Human Services, Education, and almost every state agency, including the local school districts, would be participating in gathering data on the school children and their families. "That Children's Plan was probably the most intrusive piece of legislation I have ever seen," said the Senator obviously disgusted that his Republican colleagues, who could have stopped it, supported it. "It is really an ORWELLIAN sounding piece of legislation." Senator George relates the comment of a young man who had been taken from his parents and raised institutionally in foster care. He said, "The worst parent ... is the State of Oregon." The Senator said what he hears over and over again from his constituents is (GOVERNMENT) GET OUT OF MY LIFE.
And now the home visits are looking for "at risk" children. While the change agents would want the rest of us to believe they are looking for drug addicted babies or parents with past abusive records, this simply is not the whole story for they already know who many of these people are.
One study said among the successful approaches is one in which nurses visit low income women in their homes while pregnant with their first child and two years after its birth. Nurses provide support, parenting education and try to promote the child's healthy development. The program may also be called Healthy Start, Healthy Families or some other Orwellian doublespeak that doesn't really mean what the words say, or what the average reader might imagine. They feel they can identify children under the age of 10 who might be "at risk" of future delinquency. Single mothers may be exceptionally vulnerable.
These "helpers", who are coming into the homes of low income families (because only the father works), with stay-at-home mothers, are probably the same "mothers" who dropped their children off at some government day care center so the "professional" can earn that almighty buck and continue her career at the expense of nurturing her own children. Yup, these are the "experts" who want to help you raise your kids. "We must remove the children from the crude influence of families," Soviet Communist Party educators were instructed at a conference in 1918." I'm thankful mine are raised!
A participant at the May 1987 conference in Portland, Oregon: Children Youth and Families said: "Children's abilities depend on the mother's education; therefore, we must intervene at a very young age... families with a $30,000 yearly income and college educated mother will understand the importance of early intervention." College educated mothers will "realize" that children belong in day care by the time they are six months old. They want to "route the cause of crime and delinquency at the preschool and kindergarten levels" and they felt "future criminals could be identified in the early grades." For more "wisdom" from these inebriated-with-power "professionals", refer to the website above.
These home visits by some type of government worker are bite-sized pieces of GOALS 2000. The Florida Forum, Summer 1997, said the "Parents as Teachers" program combines group interaction with home visits and while anxious, first-time parents might glean some tips on child development and rearing, few are aware that the "nice social worker" who has just visited their home goes back to her office, pulls up the child's cumulative electronic portfolio and enters data on all she has observed in the home. Can you imagine what she might write if your baby was sick all night with an earache, you rushed the baby to the doctor the next day, you were tired due to lack of sleep and your house was a disaster when she dropped by? And God forbid, if you haven't been indoctrinated by some liberal-left college professors and you aren't up to your neck in college loans so you don't have to work, you will probably be "at risk." Your chosen lifestyle will not fit the politically correct mold.
Our local newspaper reported such low-key "visits" as early as 1993 but now we see state programs pushing to assert its primacy over the family. The Wisconsin Report in 1990 said the "Parents as Teachers program teaches parents how the state wants the children to be prepared to enter school" so they can be read books like The Giver. The bottom line is simple. Just like in communist countries, these "helpers" teach and monitor politically correct parenting skills and guide parents to the proper community "partners" such as Family Resource Centers so that these parents might be trained to discourage Christian values which block the "open mindedness" needed for children to start school ready to embrace group thinking, homosexuals and global spirituality (the occult). Read [Federalization Of Children; Gradual Child Abduction]
So if you're over 50, and if these current political correct humanistic trends continue, The Giver may very well be on your horizon. I cringe for the future of our children. May our God in Heaven protect their innocent souls.
© 2003 Betty Freauf - All Rights Reserved
Betty is a former Oregon Republican Party activist having served as state party secretary, county chairman, 5th congressional vice chairman and then elected chairman, a precinct worker for many years and twice ran unsuccessfully for the Oregon State Legislature. The Republican tradition is to stay neutral in Primary races but in Betty's case. They supported her opponent. E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
"Why would such a book, which glamorizes death and the occult, be read to children as young as third graders? Book selection committees, perhaps without even reading THE GIVER, may have erroneously assumed because it received the prestigious Newberry Award, it would be safe."