Chuck Norris: Health Care Bill Allows Government to Tell You How to Raise Your Children and its on Page 838
Posted by iusbvision on August 11, 2009
Dirty Secret No. 1 in Obamacare
Tuesday, August 11, 2009Health care reforms are turning into health care revolts. Americans are turning up the heat on congressmen in town hall meetings across the U.S.
While watching these political hot August nights, I decided to research the reasons so many are opposed to Obamacare to separate the facts from the fantasy. What I discovered is that there are indeed dirty little secrets buried deep within the 1,000-plus page health care bill.
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?
Government needs less of a role in running our children’s lives and more of a role in supporting parents’ decisions for their children. Children belong to their parents, not the government. And the parents ought to have the right — and government support — to parent them without the fed’s mandates, education or intervention in our homes.
Kids are very important to my wife, Gena, and me. That’s why we’ve spent the past 17 years developing our nonprofit KICKSTART program in public schools in Texas. It builds up their self-esteem and teaches them respect and discipline. Of course, whether or not they participate in the program is their and their parents’ choice.
Be sure to follow the link above and read the rest.
The IUSB Vision Weblog 
fly on the wall said
This is nothing more than total control over our lives.
Donna Black said
We must all band together or I fear we are doomed. The government wants to control every aspect of our lives,that is Obama and his Democrats. We must stand up now!!
Mike Nowicki said
There is no way in hell the Obamites are going to indoctrinate my son into there Socialist ways.
People need to get educated in a hurry.
It is a joke, just listen to what Arlen Specter tried to do today.
We need to be heard and if getting loud helps then so be it.
[Universities are very one sided, I suggest you pick up, “The politically incorrect guide to American History” and other such books. Most home school curriculum’s also have a fabulous history and philosophy section. – Editor]
Beth Silvia said
Why are you idiots getting your information from Chuck Norris? Can’t you do your own research? Are you that pathetic that you take the word of an actor/martial arts performer? This is a bunch of hogwash. The government isn’t out to indoctrinate your children or take them away if you don’t follow them. I don’t want government health care any more than you do, but come on…Chuck Norris?
[How about posting evidence that says that he is wrong? Just calling the messenger names is not refutation. Look at the bill, does it not have the provision that Norris says it does??
Did you know that Norris has been writing about law, current events, health and other issues for WND News for years now?
If he is wrong prove it – put up or shut up. – Editor]
Missy said
Uhh…Mike, you mean, “There is no way in hell the Obamites are going to indoctrinate my son into their Socialist ways.” If you can’t learn the difference between there, their and they’re, maybe you should go the one of those one-sided universities. At least try to get your GED; I’m pretty sure basic grammar is required to pass it.
As for the Chuck Norris assertion about the parenting clause (that’s clause, not claws, Mike, just in case you can only afford a public education)…the clause alone does not say that parenting will be supported by a particular philosophy. It just says, “provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains … modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices.” What that suggests is that parents will have the opportunity to (that’s to, Mike, not too) understand why two-year old children tend to have tantrums and what can be done to minimize these outbursts. The clause suggests that parents may learn why reading books of your own choosing to your child is beneficial. Things like that are important to understand, especially for people who didn’t/couldn’t finish high school.
Further, understanding age-related behavior is essential, particularly to young and/or first-time parents, who STATISTICALLY are more likely to react irrationally to their child’s develomentally based, but often-challenging conduct.All one needs to do is look at the stats on child abuse, shaken-baby syndrome, and general instances of child neglect to understand what that scary “parenting clause” suggests.
What’s really scary is that, in the name of freedom, you so-called Americans would prefer to do nothing to help innocent children who have the misfortune of being born to parents who are ignorant about basic childhood development, parents who are stunned by the responsibilities of parenting, the under-educated who have too many children or not enough sense to realize that babies are not dollies one plays with and puts back. It is harder to get a driver’s license than to produce a child. Get a clue folks.
[You mean you want government to “help” like they have with public schools, Medicare, Social Security, the Post Office, Cash for Clunkers etc etc etc.. All of which are in horrible debt, have been criminally mismanaged and/or are failures by most conventional standards. There is nothing in the constitution or in the idea of limited government that allows such nonsense. On top of that we are approaching a time when the interest on the debt alone will be a trillion dollars a year. We just cant afford the nanny state any longer. I am glad you posted because I do not believe that you see just how silly you look trying to defend this.
By the way, when we look at Obama’s record of work under William Ayers using charity funds to instruct teachers how to radicalize students (by their own documents admission) it is not a stretch to see how such a program could be used for indoctrination and not education. Mike may not have perfect grammar but he knows more about Obama’s history and who his czars are than you do. – Editor]
Missy said
Ed. Dear, Obama was nine years old when Ayers did his radical work. Plus, that was YEARS ago…Ayers currently a university professor who has does positive work for his community, and has since renounced his radical past. Obama has met with the man, worked on school reform with him, but he’s also distanced himself from the more radical ideas. Any college student worth his/her degree will go through some phase of questioning authority, questioning the powers that rule the world…if one does not to question what is, what has been, then college was only a step, only paper to chase for some less-essential reason than critical thought.
By the way, currently, Ayer’s “has a national reputation. He lectures at Harvard and Vassar. He writes the textbooks that are the standard for innovative approaches to reaching inner-city youth.” What have you and Mike done to stem the tide of apathy and rancor among today’s youth?
Have you read, really read Dreams of My Father, from cover to cover? Have you actually read it?…come on tell the truth. If you had, you would have a grasp of Obama’s “radical phase,” rather than a shoot-from-the-hip opinion that cements a phase of youth into a cliche’ rendering of a morally complex man. Your reductionist use of the term “csar” is laughable…no real substance, so resort to loaded phrases that parade as intellect. Way to go Ed.
Bye now…I’ve got prepare for the masses I educate/indoctrinate subversively…they need salvation from Mike and the like who will keep them ill and illiterate before your or he would ever give them a real chance at the American Dream…
[Ok and now for the facts.
1. Obama was a child when Ayers was blowing people up, but the radicalism didn’t end there and has expressly defended his radical past and has stated so on numerous occasions.
At that link you can find the interview Ayers did in 2001 in Chicago Magazine titled “no regrets”. You can also see the names and get information of other radicalized associates.
https://iusbvision.wordpress.com/files/2008/10/features_ayers1.jpg Ayers standing on American Flag in 2001
2. As far as “helping schools” Instead of getting the money to schools and focusing on academics, the schools had to partner with groups such as ACORN and participate in programs to radicalize students and teachers.
Obama and Ayers worked together on this.
CNN also reported on this.
Also keep in mind that Obama said that Ayers was just a guy up the street and hid the fact that Ayers hired Obama to work on two of these charity boards with him where they funneled charity money meant to help school to groups like ACORN. Later the campaign admitted those connections.
3. https://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/08/28/more-proof-obama-lied-about-his-work-with-marxist-revolutionary-terrorist-professor-ayers/
It is interesting how you reduced this to “some phase of questioning authority”. It’s more like a life long quest to end freedom, end economic liberty, and abuse children with radical indoctrination programs that Obama was involved almost very step of the way.
We realize that you have an emotional investment in Obama from the campaign. This is no surprise since that is exactly what his campaign was designed to do. I really hope that you examine the evidence that is here and is in books such as Dick Morris Catastrophe and Fleeced. If you take a look around perhaps you will see that what is going on is not the “hope & change” you were looking for.
You mentioned that Ayers has written books and asked what I have done to compare (as if that makes up for all of the facts and arguments that you have not yet addressed or were mistaken on). Lots of people have written books. Michelle Malkin’s is number one and Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Mark Levin are all on the best seller list with her. This very editor is currently authoring his first book on public education which has a great deal of information about the damage people like Ayers has done.
Writing text books does not impress me, over half the the text books I have encountered while finishing my new degree are a joke and will be fodder for my upcoming title. So instead of trying to make it about me, try to examine the facts and arguments carefully. – Editor]