Alabama Teen Eagle Nathan Little created a very informative, insightful, & inspiring video on Eagle Forum. We applaud Nathan for his work!
Use Phyllis Schlafly's most recent column to discuss the following questions. You may view the column at www.eagleforum.org.
1. What is feminism?
2. How does Eagle Forum view feminism? How do you view the concept?
3. Is there a problem with broad definitions such as "psychological harm," "intimidation at work," and "psychological violence"?
4. How might these definitions be distorted?
5. How might you combat harmful feminist dogma?
6. What are the implications of the President's desire to make everything a global issue?
7. Phyllis states, "Feminist orthodoxy teaches that there are no innate differences between males and females with one exception. Men are naturally batterers and women are naturally victims." Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?
8. How do you define Sharia law? What are your views on the principles?
9. Why do you think the current administration chooses to ignore the matter?
10. Do you think the bills are truly about conveying "equal rights" to women? Or, do they actually put blame on men and cost the taxpayers money?
Use Phyllis' weekly column to discuss the following questions:
1. What are your views on curriculum that discusses other nationalities and cultures in the classroom?
2. How can teachers promote American nationalism to their students while still educating them on other nationalities and cultures?
3. Should teachers be held accountable for what they teach, day in and day out, in the classroom? How should this accountability be executed?
4. What are the disadvantages to teaching these courses?
5. How can the courses be taught in a way that is advantageous to American sovereignty?
6. How, as students, can you promote American nationalism to your peers?
7. If the history of America is to be accurately preserved, our textbooks must reflect truth. What other un-truths do you see being taught in schools?
8. Why do people, specifically in academia, refuse to speak of Jesus and Christianity while openly teaching of Muhammed, Islam, etc.?
9. How can parents become actively involved in school courses?
10. What are ways you can become active with your state Board of Education?
1. Is there a way for the government to hold accountable the hands to which taxpayer money is given?
2. Women are most often characterized as the victim, and men as the abusers. What has caused this stereotype? What are some of the immediate results?
3. Do you think there is a way to change the way society views the victim and the abuser in relation to their gender?
4. How would you define "domestic violence?"
5. Should the police officers be legally bound to take someone into custody each time they answer a call for help from an "abuser"?
6. What are some of the immediate consequences of the VAWA as it currently stands?
7. Do you think the VAWA should be reformed?
8. If so, how would you reform the Act?
9. Do you think women are oppressed by the "patriarchy?"
10. How do you respond to people who make this assertion?
Challenge Questions:
1. What are "civil rights?" Where does the Constitution specifically address these?
2. Research the VAWA and the history of Feminism and how each of these movements have changed gender perceptions in society. Post an article on your social networking site.
Bonus Questions:
1. Why do you think God created differences between men and women? What do you think are some of the roles intended for each?
2. Why do you think movements have arisen to eliminate the perception of gender differences? What have been the results of these movements?
One of the projects in which some homeschoolers participate is going to lobby at their state capitol so they can learn first-hand how our government functions. For several years, I have known about active homeschooling groups that do this in Missouri and in Utah. Let me tell you about the experience of a group of 14-to-18-year-old Minnesota homeschool students. Each year, they choose a public policy topic to research, discuss, and draft mock legislative resolutions. This year they selected the health care bill which was then making its way through Congress.
As soon as the health care bill passed, the kids got excited about the content of the bill, the way it was passed, and the back room deals. The student leader, 18-year-old Fletcher Warren, gave a radio interview saying, "we decided that we should do what we could." We wrote out a 3-page resolution detailing our concerns, such as the law's unconstitutionality and violation of the commerce clause. The resolution calls on Minnesota's governor, attorney general, and state legislature to seek an injunction that would relieve the state of having to comply with newly enacted national healthcare legislation. The 32 homeschoolers then gathered at the St. Paul, Minnesota statehouse to hand-deliver letters and copies of the signed resolution to Minnesota legislators. The students were able to meet with four representatives and two senators, all of whom were cordial to their young constituents.
Fletcher Warren, who served as chairman of the homeschoolers' health care committee, was pleased with the way legislators received the students and message. He described the experience of lobbying at the state capitol as "overwhelmingly positive." The students then expanded their efforts beyond the state legislature and spoke to several of their Congressmen. The students' lobbying trip turned out to be a good lesson in how government operates and how citizens can participate.
You can listen to this and other commentaries by Phyllis Schlafly at www.eagleforum.org/radio.
Use Phyllis' article, Obama STARTS to Disarm America, to discuss the following questions.
1. Why do countries develop nuclear weapons?
2. According to the U.S. Constitution, what responsibility is explicitly given to the federal government that justifies developing and maintaining nuclear warheads?
3. Why would Russia prefer that the United States destroy some of its nuclear warheads (disarmament)? What advantage does Russia have in setting the limit of nuclear warheads higher than the number it currently has?
4. What is the logic behind "equal ceilings" limit on how many nuclear warheads a country can own?
5. What kind of example does President Obama hope to set by reducing the number of nuclear warheads to equal the amount owned by Russia? Why might other countries (especially smaller countries) be disinclined to follow our example?
6. Do you think that other countries decide how many nuclear warheads to build based upon the number of nuclear weapons in the United States? Is a "world without nuclear weapons," as Obama envisions, possible?
7. How would the New START Treaty affect the United States militarily in respect to other nations?
8. What were the international effects of the United States' and Russia's post-Cold War nuclear reductions? Did they accomplish their objective through this reduction?
9. How does the New START treaty apply to those nations whose possession of nuclear arms could threaten other nations? (For example, rogue nations or terrorists.)
10. According to Article 2, Section II of the Constitution, what checks and balances are placed upon the creation of treaties?
Bonus questions:
Is there ever a time when legal control of nuclear arms or weapons is the best strategy? Are they effective?
Research articles on Russia's nuclear arms positions during the Cold War and today, comparing them to the United States' during that same time period. Look for direct quotes, government statements and policies, etc. Compare objectives.
Challenge:
Find an online news article discussing the STARTS treaty. Post your comments on the topic to the online news site.
Join the Teen Eagles Fan Page. Post a comment explaining how you would vote on the START Treaty if you were a U.S. Senator.
Use Phyllis' column, How Republicans Can Blow the Coming Election to answer the following questions.
Read Phyllis Schlafly's colum, Obama Steers the Court Far Left and discuss the following questions.
1. What qualifications does the U.S. Constitution give for appointing judges to the Supreme Court? See Article III.
2. Phyllis Schlafly defines a "supremacist" as "one who believes in or advocates the supremacy of a particular group--judges--over the lawful wishes of the people." (The Supremacists, x). Are there signs that Ms. Kagan would advocate a particular interest? Which ones?
Link to book: http://www.eagleforum.org/groups/index.html#supremacists
3. Does it matter if someone has no experience as a judge to sit on the highest court that reviews the decisions of other judges? What might be the results of confirming an inexperienced judge?
4. Should Ms. Kagan's age be a factor in the nomination process?
5. Some see Ms. Kagan's nomination as not worth fighting against because she would replace Justice Stevens, who has a record of giving liberal rulings. In other words, the "balance" of the court would not change because Ms. Kagan is likely to vote like Justice Stevens has in the past. Could Ms. Kagan's confirmation fundamentally change the direction of our nation? Why or why not?
6. What are the repercussions for confirming a person with a known anti-military bias?
7. Do you think it is important to have at least one judge on the court with military experience? Why?
8. Beyond political beliefs, does one's personal life choices and decisions affect how he or she views, interprets, and judges the world around them? How?
9. What are the implications of confirming a person who chooses to participate in sexually immoral acts like a homosexual relationship?
10. Justice Kennedy pointed to foreign laws for reasons to overturn Texas sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas (2003). [link:http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZO.html] Are there any implications that Ms. Kagan would look for foreign laws to justify possible biases she has?
11. Do you support the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court of the United States? Why or why not?
Challenge:
1. Sign the Students for Life petition opposing Elena Kagan: www.iopposekagan.
2. Post the link to the petition along with Phyllis' column to your social networking profile
Kentucky Supreme Court Justice, in the 1993 state case of Kentucky v. Wasson: "It is foolish and fruitless to ignore morality in our society and in our governmental function. Every political decision of consequence reflects a moral judgment."
