The Weekly Sam: Reprint from February, 1929, The Journal of Educational Psychology. THE “SIGHT READING” METHOD OF TEACHING READING, AS A SOURCE OF READING DISABILITY SAMUEL T. ORTON, A.M. M.D.
Reprint from February, 1929, The Journal of Educational Psychology.
THE “SIGHT READING” METHOD OF TEACHING READING,
AS A SOURCE OF READING DISABILITY
SAMUEL T. ORTON, A.M. M.D.
New York City
I feel some trepidation in offering criticism in a field somewhat outside of that
of my own endeavor but a very considerable part of my attention for the past four
years has been given to the study of reading disability from the standpoint of
cerebral physiology. This work has now extended over a comparatively large
series of cases from many different schools and both the theory which has directed
this work and the observations gained therefrom seem to bear with sufficient
directness on certain teaching methods in reading to warrant critical suggestions
which otherwise might be considered overbold.
I wish to emphasize at the beginning that the strictures which I have to offer
here do not apply to the use of the sight method of teaching reading as a whole but
only to its effect on a restricted group of children for whom, as I think we can
show, this technique is not only not adapted but often proves an actual obstacle to
reading progress, and moreover I believe that this group is one of considerable
educational importance both because of its size and because here faulty teaching
methods may not only prevent the acquisition of academic education by children of
average capacity but may also give rise to far reaching damage to their emotional
life. The sight reading method (or “look and say” of the English) has been credited
with giving much faster progress in the acquisition of reading facility than its
precursors and this statement I will not challenge if the measure of
accomplishment be the average progress of a group or class. Average progress of
large numerical units, however, makes no allowance for the study of effect in
individual, particularly if certain of them deviate to some degree from the others in
their methods of acquisition and therefore in their teaching requirements. To the
mental hygienist whose interest is focused on the individual and his problems
rather than on group progress the results as determined by average accomplishment
are of little value whereas the effect of a given method on the individual child is all
important.
Outstanding cases of so-called “congenital word blindness”—a complete
inability to learn to read—have been recognized and studied for a number of years
at first chiefly by physicians. It has also been recognized by teachers and
psychologists that there is a large group of children who have a much greater
difficulty in getting started in reading than would be expected from their ability in
arithmetic, from then ease in auditory acquisition and from their general alertness.
In the past there has been a tendency, at least among medical men, and to a
considerable degree among psychologists as well to exclude the minor cases of
slow learning in reading from the category of congenital word blindness. This
largely derives from the work of Hinshelwood1 who made the first extensive study
of these cases following the pioneer work of Kerry
and Morgan.
Hinshelwood’s
statement in this is “. . . the rapidity and ease with which children learn to read by
sight vary a great deal. No doubt it is a comparatively common thing to find some
who lag considerably behind their fellows, because of their slowness and difficulty
in acquiring their visual word memories, but I regard these slight defects as only
physiological variations and not to be regarded as pathological conditions. It
becomes a source of confusion to apply to such cases as has been done of late the
term of ‘congenital word blindness’ which should be reserved for the really grave
degrees of this defect which manifestly are the result of a pathological condition of
the visual memory center and which have proved refractory to all ordinary
methods of school instruction.” Unfortunately, Hinchelwood’s criterion is a
double one, neither part of which can be looked upon as of sufficient diagnostic
accuracy to establish a clear-cut entity. Not only has no pathological condition of
the visual memory center yet been substantiated in such cases but there are certain
neurological and clinical data which suggest that no such condition exists. Again,
the “ordinary methods of school instruction” does not prove to be an accurate
measure. Such methods vary widely and our own figures indicate that the number
of children who show a significant handicap in reading is to some degrees related
to the teaching method in use. Bachmann
has called attention to the looseness of
the concept of congenital word blindness and related to this the striking variation in
the frequency of such cases as recorded by various authors. Without some fairly
clear objective symptoms on which to establish the entity, the choice of cases to be
included naturally rests on the judgment of the examiner as to the severity of the
disability.
My own initial work
in this field led to a firm conviction that we were
dealing here, not with two separate groups—a physiological and a pathological—
but that those children who were specifically retarded in reading (thus excluding
cases of general mental defect) formed a graded series extending from the normal
to the extreme and that they showed consistent characteristic performance which
not only would serve for diagnosis but which also was highly suggestive of the
reason for their lack of progress and which gave excellent cues to methods for
retraining. I was convinced not only that the specific reading disability formed an
entity of much greater numerical importance than had been recognized before but
that it was (even in the extreme cases) an obstacle of a physiological nature rather
than a pathological condition and that therefore adequate special methods of
teaching should correct it.
I can not here go fully into the details of the anatomical background for our
present theory of this disability but some presentation is necessary in order to
illustrate the basis for the criticism of teaching method which is here offered.
Only a small portion of the retina of the eye is used in acquisition of reading.
This is the focus of central vision or the macula lutea, so called because it is seen
as a yellow spot in ophthalmoscopic examinations. The rest of the retina receives
only general and less detailed impressions coming from outside the rather small
area to which we are directing our attention. This point is noteworthy because the
nervous connections of these two divisions of the retina are quite unlike. The
peripheral retina or outer zone has connections with only one-half of the brain
(there are some complexities here but these need not concern us). The macula
lutea, however, which receives impressions with greatest detail and which is hence
used exclusively in learning to read, has a double connection with the brain. The
nerve fibers arising here divide and one-half of those starting from each macula
lueta to the visual area of the hemisphere of the brain of the same side and the
other half to the corresponding area of the opposite hemisphere. Thus impressions
received by either eye, or by both eyes, are relayed simultaneously to both
hemispheres of the brain. This double implantation does not give us a double
sensation in consciousness, however, as a touch on both thumbs would do. The
simultaneous activity of both areas results in our seeing but a single image. The
visual sensation, however, is not a unitary function.
There is apparently need for
the simultaneous or additive activity of several parts of the visual cerebral
mechanisms to complete the linkage of a printed symbol with its meaning and the
steps in this process arc shown in relief by differential losses such as are seen when
certain parts of the back of the brain are destroyed by disease. When all of that
part of the brain which has to do with vision is destroyed the individual becomes
totally blind. The eyes, however, are not damaged and they can still be moved and
they will turn toward a sudden sound and the pupils will respond by closing and
opening to increase and decrease of the amount of light which strikes them. This
condition is known as cortical blindness, to differentiate it from blindness due to
disease of the eyes or optic nerves. We may, however, see things surrounding us
with sufficient clarity to avoid colliding with them, that is to guide our general
body movements but without being able to appreciate the meaning of things which
we see.
This was first demonstrated by Munk in dogs in which much of this part
of the brain had been removed. They were able to avoid collisions but did not
recognize their master or even food by sight alone, and did not cringe from a whip.
To this condition Munk gave the name of mindblindness and its parallel has since
frequently been recorded in cases of disease of the human brain. Apparently at the
first level the visual area of the brain serves as a very accurate guide to motion and
it probably also furnishes the element of awareness of the external origin of a
sensation (as contrasted to & memory). In psychological terms it furnishes the
pure perceptual element to sensation but simultaneous or additive activity in other
higher level visual areas are requisite to attach meaning and again we know that
this is not accomplished in one step. If destruction of brain tissue happens in a
certain area there results a condition in which the patient not only can see correctly
but can also understand the meaning of objects seen, but in which the ability to
read the printed or written word is entirely lost.
That vision in the ordinary sense
is normal, is shown by the fact that such a patient can copy printed material but
cannot read either the original or his copy. Thus we see from these differential
losses that the process of linking a printed word to its meaning passes through at
least three stages of elaboration in the brain before it is completed.
There are differences, however, in the brain destruction necessary to produce
losses at these different elaborative levels. Destruction in one hemisphere only is
not sufficient to produce either cortical blindness or mindblindness. At these first
two levels of elaboration, that is in perception and recognition of the meaning of
objects, apparently destruction must involve the areas subserving these functions in
both hemispheres before their loss results. The two hemispheres are apparently of
equal importance here as it apparently makes no difference which side is affected;
i.e., either hemisphere is alone adequate for these functions. Exception must be
taken to these statements in the case of peripheral vision but, as noted before, this
is not of interest to us here since central vision is used exclusively in learning to
read.
When we come to the third plane of elaboration, the situation is strikingly
different, this is the level at which the written or printed symbol is linked with its
meaning and hence it is variously described as the associative, concept, or
symbolic level. Here not only is damage to one hemisphere sufficient to destroy
function but it makes a difference which hemisphere is affected.
If the hemisphere
which is known as the dominant happens to suffer, a complete loss of this function
results and the patient becomes word blind. If, on the other hand, the damage
occurs in the other hemisphere—the non-dominant—nothing apparently happens.
So entirely without result is a destruction here that this area of the brain takes its
place with certain others among those which the surgeons called the “silent areas”
of the brain. Obviously, the visual records implanted in both halves of the brain
are not requisite for reading. This situation also exists in the field of understanding
of the spoken word, and of speech and of writing. In all four of these functions
destruction in the dominant hemisphere in the so-called language zone is
meaningful while destruction in exactly similar parts of the opposite hemisphere is
meaningless.
Thus we learn to understand, to read, to speak, and to write words from sensory
records or engrams of one hemisphere only. This fact is so striking that we have
been prone to overlook what must happen in the inactive side. We believe today
that the completed growth and development of nerve coils is largely a result of
stimulation. If cells do not receive stimuli they do not reach their full
development. The two sides of the brain do not show much, if any, difference in
size or complexity and certainly no such difference as we see in function as
outlined above. To account for equality of growth we must accept equality of
stimulation—equal nervous irradiated of the two sides—and if they are equally
irradiated, records must be left behind in each; i.e., engrams must be formed in the
non-dominant as well as in the dominant hemisphere.
To account then for the
difference in effect of damage in the two sides we must assume that the engrams of
one side become the controlling pattern through establishment of a physiological
habit of use of that set and that the other set of recorded engrams is latent or elided.
Variations in the completeness of this physiological selection, i.e., failure of elision
of the non-dominant engrams, forms the kernel of my conception of the reading
disability. Such a theory conforms nicely to our observations that these cases are
not to be divided into two categories, that is, cases of word blindness and cases
of slow acquisition of reading, but that they form a series graded in severity
according to the degree of confusion which exists in choice of engrains and it also
offers an explanation of certain errors and peculiarities which characterize their
performance.
The two halves of the body are strictly antitropic, that is, reversed or mirrored
copies of each other. The muscles and joints of the right and left hand, for
example, are alike but reversed in arrangement. This is also true of the groups of
nerve cells in the spinal cord which control the simpler motor responses (spinal
reflexes) and also of the cells in the brain which combine or integrate these simpler
spinal units into more complex acts.
The movements of the left hand, therefore,
which are the exact counterpart of the right will give a mirrored result. Thus, the
movements of sinistrad (mirror) writing with the left hand are exactly comparable
to those of dextrad writing with the right hand and it seems therefore highly
probable that the engrams which are stored in the silent areas of the non-dominant
hemisphere are opposite in sigh, i.e., mirrored copies, of those in the dominant. If
then these opposite engrams are not elided through establishment of consistent
selection from one hemisphere we would expect them to evince themselves by
errors or confusion in direction and orientation and this is exactly what we find in
cases of delayed reading.
This description is really “putting the cart before the horse” as our observations
of tendency to reversals came first and the theory developed therefrom but this
method of presentation has been adopted for the sake of clarity. Many workers
with word blind children have noted their tendency to reversals but none, so far as
I am aware, have offered an adequate explanation of it.
My original studies in a small group of cases convinced me that there were
certain “symptoms” in reading disability which seemed to characterize the whole
group and these were confusions between lower case b and d and between p and q,
uncertainty in reading short pallindromic words like was and saw, not and ton, and
on and no; a tendency to reverse parts of words or whole syllables as when gray is
read as gary, tarnish as tarshin and tomorrow as tworrom; a greater facility than
usual in reading from the mirror, and frequently a facility in producing mirror
writing.
These observations have been adequately supported in an extended study
of a much larger group of cases. Many other types of errors are to be found in the
performance of retarded readers but they appear to me to be secondary effects due
to the failure of association which has resulted from the obstacle presented by
confusion in direction. The relation of the cardinal symptoms to the theory as
above outlined is obvious and I think has direct bearing on the teaching method.
Visual presentation will, hypothetically at least, result in the implantation of paired
engrams and certain other factors must determine which of these is selected for
associative linkage.
What these factors are as a whole, we can not consider here
although it may be well to suggest that heredity probably plays a part in the
establishment of dominance here comparable to that which it plays in stuttering
and in left-handedness. Undoubtedly training influences may be brought to bear
on this process of choice, however, and from the theoretical standpoint the most
promising of these should be that of kinesthetic training by tracing or writing while
reading and sounding and by following the letters with the finger (a method under
taboo today) to insure consistent direction of reading during phonetic synthesis of
the word or syllable.
Under a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, an extended field study was
carried out in 1926-27 in Iowa by the organization, as a part of the research work
of the State Psychopathic Hospital, of a Mobile Mental Hygiene Unit to visit
schools in various communities and a Laboratory Unit to study selected cases more
intensively. Fuller reports of these studies are to appear elsewhere but certain
observations may be quoted here. In my original group of reading disability cases,
I was surprised at the large proportion of these children encountered. Fifteen out
of one hundred twenty-five children sent by their teachers to our experimental field
clinic for a variety of problems6 seemed to me to show evidence of this trouble. In
our extended work we have found in every community visited no less than two per
cent of the total school population to be retarded readers showing this
characteristic picture. Our studies were not carried out as a survey and hence these
figures probably fall far below the actual numbers.
There was however a difference
in the numbers of cases encountered in certain communities which seemed to bear
directly on the subjects here considered. Of two communities of about the same
constituent population, in one we found about two per cent of the school
population to be retarded in reading to a significant degree and to show
symptomatic evidence of the specific disability, while in the second we found more
then double this percentage. In the community with the lesser number of cases,
sight reading methods were employed but when children did not progress by this
method, they were also given help by the phonetic method. In the town with the
larger number, no child was given any other type of reading training until he or she
had learned ninety words by sight.
Aside then from theoretical considerations, this strongly suggests that the sight
method not only will not eradicate a reading disability of this type but may actually
produce a number of cases. Moreover, our retraining experiments7
seem to indicate clearly that such children can be trained to read properly with adequate
special methods devised to eradicate the confusion in direction and in orientation
and this has also been borne out by the remedial efforts of other workers.
Our studies of children with reading disabilities has also brought to light certain
other aspects of the problem which are of educational importance but which can
not be elaborated here.
Among these were notably the effect of this unrecognized
disability, upon the personality and behavior of the child. Many children were
referred to our clinics by their teachers in the belief that they were feeble-minded,
others exhibited conduct disorders and undesirable personality reactions which
upon analysis appeared to be entirely secondary to the reading defect and which
improved markedly when special training was instituted to overcome the reading
disability.
In brief, while “sight reading” may give greater progress when measured by the
average of a group, it may also prove a serious obstacle to educable children who
happen to deviate from the average in the case of establishment of a clear-cut
unilateral brain habit. These physiological deviates form a graded group extending
in severity from the normal to extreme cases (congenital word blindness). They
can be detected by appropriate examinations and trained to overcome their
handicap by specific methods of teaching. While the number of children who
suffer from such a severe grade of the disability as to be practically uneducable by
ordinary methods is quite small, the number in whom the disability exists to a
sufficient degree to be a serious handicap to school performance and to wholesome
personality development probably is of real numerical importance and moreover
there seems to be reason to believe that even those who make a spontaneous
adjustment without special training, and thus learn to read, may never gain a
facility in this accomplishment commensurate with their ability in other lines.
REFERENCES
1. Hinshelwood, James: “Congenital Word Blindness.” Lewis, London 1917.
2. Kerr, James: The Howard Price Essay of the Royal Statistical Society, 1896.
3. Pringle, Morgan W.: “A Case of Congenital Wordblindness.” British Medical Journal,
July 11, 1896.
4. Bachmann, Fritz: “Uber Kongenitale Wortblindheist.” Karger, Berlin, 1927.
5. Orton, S. T.: “Wordblindness” in School Children. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry,
Vol. XIV, Nov., 1925.
6. Lyday, June F.: The Greene County Medical Clinic. Mental Hygiene. Vol. X, No. 4,
October, 1926.
7. Monroe, Marion: Genetic Psychology Monograms. Oct.-Nov. Nov., 1928.
Edited by Donald L. Potter on 5/31/03 from an OCR scan of a Reprint.
www.donpotter.net
The above article came from the Sam Blumenfeld Archives- a free on-line recourse. Please visit and sign up; http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/main.htm
Samuel Morse’s Telegraph; and slavery conditions in early U.S. described by his father, Jedediah Morse, “Father of American Geography” – American Minute with Bill Federer
The world of communication was revolutionized by Samuel Finley Breese Morse, who died April 2, 1872.
Samuel F.B. Morse invented the Telegraph and the Morse Code.
He graduated from Yale in 1810, and became one of the greatest portrait artists.
He founded the National Academy of Design, and served as its president for 20 years.
In 1831, Morse was appointed to the first chair of fine arts in America, the Professor of Sculpture and Painting at New York University.
Morse obtained a patent for his telegraph, but found it difficult to get financial backers.
During the anxious days between failure and success, Samuel F.B. Morse wrote to his wife:
“The only gleam of hope, and I can not underrate it, is from confidence in God. When I look upward it calms my apprehensions for the future, and I seem to hear a voice saying:
‘If I clothe the lilies of the field, shall I not also clothe you?’ Here is my strong confidence, and I will wait patiently for the direction of Providence.”
In 1843, Congress agreed to underwrite Morse to erect the first telegraph lines between Baltimore and the U.S. Supreme Court chamber in Washington, D.C.
In 1843, Congress agreed to underwrite Morse to erect the first telegraph lines between Baltimore and the U.S. Supreme Court chamber in Washington, D.C.He demonstrated the telegraph for the first time on May 24, 1844, allowing Annie Ellsworth, the young daughter of a friend, to chose the message. She selected a verse from the Bible, Numbers 23:23,
“What hath God wrought?”
The Morse Code, considered the first digital binary code, became an international means of telecommunications.
It revolutionized the transfer of information and knowledge worldwide, and became the basis for all later advancements in communication.
Samuel Morse wrote:“Every child has a dream, to pursue the dream is in every child’s hand to make it a reality. One’s invention is another’s tool.”
“Education without religion is in danger of substituting wild theories for the simple commonsense rules of Christianity.”
Four years before his death, Samuel F.B. Morse wrote:
“The nearer I approach to the end of my pilgrimage, the clearer is the evidence of the divine origin of the Bible, the grandeur and sublimity of God’s remedy for fallen man are more appreciated, and the future is illumined with hope and joy.”
Samuel F.B. Morse was the son of educator Jedediah Morse, known as “Father of American Geography.”
Jedediah Morse published:
- Geography Made Easy, 1784, the first geography book published in the United States;
- The American Geography, 1789;
- Elements of Geography, 1795;
- The American Gazetteer, 1797;
- A New Gazetteer of the Eastern Continent, 1802;
- A Compendious History of New England, 1804; and
- Annals of the American Revolution.
Jedediah Morse received his Doctor of Divinity degree from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland in 1795.
Morse was a member of the board of overseers of Harvard College during a fateful controversy.
In 1803, Harvard’s Hollis Professor of Divinity, David Tappan, died, and the following year Harvard’s President, Joseph Willard, died.
Morse insisted faithful orthodox Christians be elected to take their places.
After a heated debate, Morse lost, and in 1805, liberals on the board elected Unitarian Christians Henry Ware as head of Harvard’s Divinity School and Samuel Webber as President of Harvard.
This was the pivotal moment beginning Harvard’s drift away from the traditional “revealed religion” of Calvinist Protestant Christianity, which the new leadership of Harvard increasingly saw as an enemy to be purged.
Historian Samuel Eliot Morrison wrote in Three Centuries of Harvard (1936):
“Thus the theological department of New England’s oldest university went Unitarian. Orthodox Calvinists of the true Puritan tradition now became open enemies to Harvard.”
In protest, Jedediah Morse and others founded Andover Theological Seminary in 1807 as the conservative Christian alternative to the liberal Harvard Divinity School.
An educator, Jedediah Morse was friends with Noah Webster –compiler of the Dictionary; Benjamin Silliman –Yale Professor who was the first to distill petroleum; and Jeremy Belknap –who wrote History of New Hampshire.
In 1798, Jedediah Morse delivered three sermons on the parties responsible for instigating the French Revolution, citing John Robison’s Proofs of a Conspiracy: Against All The Religions and Governments Of Europe, Carried On In The Secret Meetings of Freemasons, Illuminati, and Reading Societies.When presented with the information, President George Washington wrote:“It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States.
On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.
The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavored to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of separation).
That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.”
(The Writings of George Washington, Volume 14, 1798–1799, New York, G. P. Putmans Sons, 1893, p. 119).
In his 1792 edition of The American Geography, or a View of the Present Situation of the United States of America, Jedidiah Morse wrote:
“The island Madagascar … has several petty savage kings of its own, both Arabs and Negroes, who making war on each other, sell their prisoners for slaves to the shipping which call here, taking clothes, utensils and other necessaries in return …
… The negroes of Africa … are subject to the most barbarous despotism. The savage tyrants who rule over them, make war upon each other for human plunder! and the wretched victims, bartered for spiritous liquors, are torn from their families, their friends, and their native land, and consigned for life to misery, toil and bondage …Near the river Niger … the Negroes are governed by a number of absolute princes. The inhabitants are mostly pagans and idolaters … The greater part of the poor Negroes in the West-Indies and the southern states, were brought from these two countries (of Guinea and area of West Africa.)”
At the time John Newton, former slave-trader who composed Amazing Grace, and British Parliamentarian William Wilberforce, were fighting to end Britain’s slave trade, Jedidiah Morse condemned the slave trade in The American Geography, 1792:
“But how am I shocked to inform you, that this infernal commerce is carried on … by English men, whose ancestors have bled in the cause of liberty …
I cannot give you a more striking proof of the ideas of horror which the captive negroes entertain of the state of servitude they are to undergo.”
Morse estimated the number of armed citizens:
“The number of inhabitants in the United States to be three millions, eighty three thousand. Deduct from this five hundred and sixty thousand, the supposed number of negroes …
Suppose one sixth part of these capable of bearing arms, it will be found that the number of fencible (capable of defense) men in the United States are four hundred and twenty thousand.”
Morse gave contemporary accounts of the condition of slavery in the early states:
“NEW HAMPSHIRE … Slaves there are none. Negroes, who were never numerous in New-Hampshire, are all free by the first article of the bill of rights.”
“NEW HAMPSHIRE … Slaves there are none. Negroes, who were never numerous in New-Hampshire, are all free by the first article of the bill of rights.”MASSACHUSETTS … The Negro trade is totally prohibited in Massachusetts, by an act passed in the winter of 1788 …In 1656 … laws in England, at this time, were very severe against the Quakers … many were confined in prisons where they died … King Charles the second also, in a letter to the colony of Massachusetts, approved of their severity …
These unhappy disturbances continued until the friends of the Quakers in England interposed, and obtained an order from the king, September 9th, 1661, requiring that a stop should be put to all capital or corporal punishment of his subjects called Quakers …
They are a moral, friendly, and benevolent people, and have much merit … particularly for their exertions in the abolition of the slavery of the Negroes.”
“RHODE ISLAND … (After the Revolution) the slave trade, which was a source of wealth to many of the people in Newport … has happily been abolished.The legislature have passed a law prohibiting ships from going to Africa for slaves, and selling them in the West-India islands …
This law is more favorable to the cause of humanity, than to the temporal interests of the merchants who had been engaged in this inhuman trade.”
“NEW YORK … There … is … ‘The society for the manumission of slaves, and protecting such of them as have been or may be liberated.'”
“NEW JERSEY … County of Burlington … On the island are one hundred and sixty houses, nine hundred white, and one hundred black inhabitants. But few of the negroes are slaves.
There are two houses for public worship in the town, one for the Friends or Quakers, who are the most numerous, and one for Episcopalians.”
“PENNSYLVANIA … Of the great variety of religious denominations … the FRIENDS or QUAKERS are the most numerous …
They came over to America as early as 1656, but were not indulged the free exercise of their religion in New-England.
They were the first settlers of Pennsylvania in 1682, under William Penn, and have ever since flourished in the free enjoyment of their religion.
They believe that God has given to all men sufficient light to work their salvation … They neither give titles, nor use compliments in their conversation or writings, believing that whatsoever is more than yea, yea, and nay, nay, cometh of evil.
They conscientiously avoid, as unlawful, kneeling, bowing, or uncovering the head to any person. They discard all superfluities in dress or equipage; all games, sports, and plays, as unbecoming the Christian.
‘Swear not at all’ is an article of their creed, literally observed in its utmost extent. They believe it unlawful, to fight in any case whatever; and think that if their enemy smite them on the one cheek, they ought to turn to him the other also.
They are generally honest, punctual, and even punctilious in their dealings; provident for the necessities of their poor; friends to humanity, and of course enemies to slavery …”
“… THE PENNSYLVANIA SOCIETY for promoting the ABOLITION OF SLAVERY, and the relief of FREE NEGROES unlawfully held in bondage, was begun in 1774, and enlarged on the 23d of April, 1787 …
The legislature of this state have favored the humane designs of this society, by ‘An Act for the gradual Abolition of Slavery;’ passed on the 1st of March, 1780;
wherein, among other things, it is ordained, that no person born within the state, after the passing of the act, shall be considered as a servant for life; and all perpetual slavery is, by this act, forever abolished …
There is the Protestant Episcopal Academy–a very flourishing institution, The Academy for Young Ladies, another for the Friends or Quakers, and one for the Germans; besides five free schools, one for the people called Quakers, one for Presbyterians, one for Catholics, one for Germans, and one for Negroes.”
Morse continued:
“MARYLAND … There is … an indolence and inactivity in their whole behavior, which are evidently the effects of solitude and slavery. As the negroes perform all the manual labor, their masters are left to saunter away life in sloth, and too often in ignorance.”
“NORTH CAROLINA … The women, except in some of the populous towns, have very little (communication) with each other … They possess a great deal of kindness, and, except that they suffer their infant babes to suck the breasts of their black nurses, are good mothers, and obedient wives.”
Morse described how slavery was in disobedience to Christianity:
“SOUTH CAROLINA … The mischievous influence of slavery … in … southern states … the absolute authority which is exercised over their slaves, too much favors a haughty, supercilious behavior.
A disposition to obey the Christian precept, ‘To do to others as we would that others should do unto us,’ is NOT cherished by a daily exhibition of many.”
Morse included in The American Geography:
“VIRGINIA … A sensible gentleman… traveled through the middle settlements … has given the … following …
The women … are immoderately fond of dancing, and indeed it is almost the only amusement they partake of …
Towards the close of an evening, when the company are pretty well tired with country dances, it is usual to dance jiggs; a practice originally borrowed, I am informed, from the Negroes.
These dances are without any method or regularity: A gentleman and lady stand up, and dance about the room … in an irregular fantastical manner.'”
Morse quoted Jefferson’s History of Virginia:
“‘In the very first session (1777) held under the republican government, the (Virginia) assembly passed a law for the perpetual prohibition of the importation of slaves.
This will in some measure stop the increase of this great political and moral evil, while the minds of our citizens may be ripening for a complete emancipation of human nature …
In October 1786, an act was passed by the Virginia assembly, prohibiting the importation of slaves into the commonwealth, upon penalty of the forfeiture of the sum of 1000 pounds for every slave.
And every slave imported contrary to the true intent and meaning of this act, becomes free …
By the (Northwest) Ordinance of Congress, passed on the 13th of July, 1787 … Article 6th. There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”
Morse described further:
“Much has been written of late to shew the injustice and iniquity of enslaving the Africans …
From repeated … calculations, it has been found, that the expense of maintaining a slave … is greater than that of maintaining a free man;
and the labor of the free man, influenced by the powerful motive of gain, is at least twice as profitable to the employer as that of the slave.
Besides, slavery is the bane of industry … Industry is the offspring of necessity … Slavery precludes this necessity; and indolence, which strikes at the root of all social and political happiness, is the unhappy consequence …
The injustice of the practice, shew that slavery is impolitic (unwise). Its influence on manners and morals is equally pernicious (destructive).”
Morse again quoted Jefferson:
“Jefferson observes, ‘Commerce between master and slave is … the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other …
‘And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?
‘Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever;
that considering numbers … a revolution of the wheel of fortune, and exchange of situation, is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference? — The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.'”
Morse wrote:
“Under the federal government which is now established, we have reason to believe that all slaves in the United States will in time be emancipated …
Whether this will be affected by transporting them back to Africa; or by colonizing them in some part of our own territory, and extending to them our alliance and protection until they shall have acquired strength sufficient for their own defense; or by incorporation with the whites; or in some other way, remains to be determined.
All these methods are attended with difficulties. The first would be cruel; the second dangerous …
Deep-rooted prejudices … recollections … of the injuries … new provocations … would tend to divide them into parties, and produce convulsions … But justice and humanity demand that these difficulties should be surmounted.”
Morse concluded:
“In the middle and northern states … Societies for the manumission of slaves have been instituted in Philadelphia and New-York; and laws have been enacted, and other measures taken in the New-England states to accomplish the same purpose.
The FRIENDS, (commonly called Quakers,) have evinced the propriety of their name, by their goodness in originating, and their vigorous exertions in executing, this truly humane and benevolent design …
The time, however, is anticipated when all distinctions between master and slave shall be abolished;
and when the language, manners, customs, political and religious sentiments of the mixed mass of people who inhabit the United States, shall have become so assimilated, as that all nominal distinctions shall be lost in the general and honorable name of AMERICANS.”
Jedediah Morse founded the New England Tract Society in 1814, and the American Bible Society in 1816.
He was a member of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, 1811-19.
In an “Election Sermon” given at Charleston, Massachusetts, April 25, 1799, Jedediah Morse stated:
“To the kindly influence of Christianity we owe that degree of civil freedom, and political and social happiness which mankind now enjoys.
In proportion as the genuine effects of Christianity are diminished in any nation, either through unbelief, or the corruption of its doctrines, or the neglect of its institutions;
in the same proportion will the people of that nation recede from the blessings of genuine freedom, and approximate the miseries of complete despotism.
I hold this to be a truth confirmed by experience …”
Morse concluded:
“If so, it follows, that all efforts to destroy the foundations of our holy religion, ultimately tend to the subversion also of our political freedom and happiness.
Whenever the pillars of Christianity shall be overthrown, our present republican forms of government, and all the blessings which flow from them, must fall with them.”
On his tombstone is written:
“In memory of Jedediah Morse — The Father of American Geography — Born in Woodstock, Windham County, Connecticut — August 23, 1761 — Died in New Haven, June 9, 1826 — In the Joy of a Triumphant Faith in Christ”
Reposted with permission by The American Minute https://americanminute.com/
Sandra Merritt Asks SCOTUS To Take Planned Parenthood Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Liberty Counsel has filed a petition for writ of certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the previous ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals against Sandra Merritt in Planned Parenthood’s multimillion-dollar civil lawsuit for her undercover investigation of the abortion giant. The implications of this case have far-reaching First Amendment consequences involving free speech and undercover journalism.
In the petition for writ of certiorari, Liberty Counsel asks the High Court to consider “whether the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause protects newsgathering journalists, who operate under an alias to document and expose what they reasonably believe to be unlawful conduct, from being subjected to punitive liability for ‘fraud.’ This case concerns whether, and to what extent, the press may raise the First Amendment as a defense against generally applicable tort laws when undercover journalists gather and publish truthful news of significant public importance. Accordingly, the First Amendment not only protects the publication of news; it also protects the newsgathering process, including undercover investigations, because ‘without some protection for seeking out the news, freedom of the press could be eviscerated.’”
Merritt and David Daleiden, founder of Center for Medical Progress, released videos in 2015 exposing Planned Parenthood’s illegal trade in aborted baby body parts, after a 30-month undercover operation. The videos showed Planned Parenthood executives haggling over prices of aborted baby body parts and discussing how they change abortion procedures to obtain more intact organs.
In October 2022, a three-member panel of the Ninth Circuit ruled against Merritt and Daleiden regarding numerous errors of the trial court, including: (1) the award to Planned Parenthood of millions of dollars in “damages” involving publication of Planned Parenthood’s own words, without any proof that the undercover videos were false or deceptive, in violation of the First Amendment; (2) the use of Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to punish constitutionally protected undercover journalism intended to expose unethical and criminal wrongdoing; (3) the award to Planned Parenthood of “damages” involving legally recorded conversations without allowing the jury to hear those conversations, and without requiring Planned Parenthood to prove that the conversations recorded in public places were “confidential;” and (4) the failure of the district court judge to recuse himself from this case, despite the appearance of impropriety resulting from his connections to Planned Parenthood.
Liberty Counsel then filed a request for an en banc (full court) review and presented argument that the appeals court should reverse the lower court’s ruling, order a new trial, and strike the punitive damages award. The Ninth Circuit denied the request.
In 2019, the case was heard by San Francisco’s U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick III, who is the founder of the Good Samaritan Family Resource Center that houses the Planned Parenthood of Northern California facility in its complex. In 2017, the defense requested that Orrick recuse himself from the case and he refused. Judge Orrick severely restricted the evidence, and at the end, gave instructions to the jury on how they should rule on critical issues. The jury decided in favor of the abortion giant on each count, including RICO, and awarded more than $2 million in damages. The court subsequently awarded Planned Parenthood nearly $14 million in attorney’s fees and costs, for a total judgment of over $16 million.
Liberty Counsel’s Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Sandra Merritt is asking the Supreme Court to undo the blatant injustice of this case. Every journalist and person who values free speech and a free press should be concerned with the implications of this case. We will fight for the free speech rights of all people.”
Liberty Counsel provides broadcast quality TV interviews via Hi-Def Skype and LTN at no cost.
(The above is a news release from Liberty Counsel http://www.lc.org
Camp Constitution Pleased to Announce Two New Sponsors
Camp Constitution is pleased to announce two new sponsors:
Scott Lively Store https://scottlively.store which features the books authored by Dr. Scott Lively including The Pink Swastika Homosexuality in the Nazi Party-a book which was banned from Amazon
And:
MAP Estate Planning https://www.mapestateplanning.com/ Throughout six decades, MAP Estate Planning grew from a small solo practice into a successful, multi-faceted wealth management firm, achieved by employing the same level of service, integrity and knowledge founder Tom Ziniti brought to his clients from day one. Tom’s family still run the firm
Our sponsors help make Camp Constitution possible. If you own a business or manage or support a like-minded non-profit, please consider becoming a sponsor. For more information, contact Hal Shurtleff (857) 498-1309 or campconstitution1@gmail.com
The Weekly Sam: The Miracle of Alpha-Phonics A Teacher’s Testimonial by Paul Lukawski
(The following was written in 2008);
I have been a high school English teacher for 14 years. I remember in college wanting to
know how to teach children to read. I went to a teacher college established in 1910. The
school had one of the oldest colleges in the country. Its College of Education
enjoyed an excellent reputation. I asked three different professors how do you teach
reading I received three different vague responses.
After I completed my second year of teaching. I realized that my students could not read. I
taught grades nine through twelve. The second year, I had three classes of ninth graders. I
assigned the novel To Kill a Mocking Bird for them to read. I realized that most of my
students could not read the novel’s literate narrative.
It was during this time that I heard Samuel Blumenfeld interviewed on shortwave radio.
At this time the Rodney King verdict had come in and there was rioting in the streets of
LA. He said that the reason the people were rioting was that they did not have jobs. They
did not have jobs because they were illiterate. He said you could tell they were illiterate
by listening to the lyrics of the songs they listened to and by the way they talked.
I was intrigued by what he said because it verified my experience as a high school
teacher. He then said the schools were at fault because of the way they taught reading. I
was again intrigued because of my experience in college trying to determine how to teach
children to read. I was never taught it in college.
Mr. Blumenfeld had made two provocative statements on the radio, but I knew them to be
true because of my personal experience. I then decided to buy a couple of his books,
including Alpha-Phonics. My third year of teaching, I had a class of ninth graders that
consisted of the worst performing students in the school These students were in the
dropout prevention progI3IIL They were waiting until they turned sixteen to drop out of
schooL I teach in our state’s poorest county and our district at that time had a high drop
out rate. Also in the class were several students from Mexico and one from Haiti. These
students were speakers of other languages (ESOL). Their only problem was that they had
a limited understanding of English. Every day in the class was a strugg1e with disruptive.
behavior, and if I could finish class without a student being sent to the office for
discipline problems, I considered it a success.
(Sam Blumenfeld teaching children)
The students bad chronic discipline problems; they bad trouble with the law, every
problem you could imagine. After two months of getting absolutely nowhere with the
students I decided that I would try an experiment. I was going to use Alpha-Phonics
beginning with lesson one to teach those that wanted to learn how to read. I told the class
that those that wanted to learn would sit 0n this side of the and those that did not
were to sit on the opposite side of the 100m. The only rule was a student could not
interfere with the Alpha-Phonics lesson.
Until this time, everyone sat scattered around the back of the room, as I did not have a
seating chart. Any student, when given the option will not sit in the front of the room
with the teacher. The stage being set, I began the first day by reading the directions from
the “Teachers Manual” to Alpha-Phonics and beginning with lesson one. I wondered
what response I would get.
I was shocked by the response of the students. Nothing could have prepared me for what
happened. If someone had told me what would happen I would not have believed them.
With the exception of a few students who sat on the other side of the room because they
did not want to participate, all of the students followed along as I wrote the lessons on the
board. l would write the lesson on the board, read it out loud, and then have them read.
The students leaned forward in their desks and followed along.
The next day the students all sat in the front of the room. Everyone would raise their band
and want to read. Indeed, after the first few days, the students would fuss among
themselves to read out aloud. They fought over who could write the lessons on the board..
Everyone wanted to read aloud. Everyone sat in front of the room. There were no
discipline problems. The entire class had been transformed. I bad discovered a disturbing.
truth.
We worked through the book; and about halfway through the book, we began reading
Sounder and The Old Man and the Sea.. One youth in the class who could not read and
who had been a behavior problem told me that every night he would sit with his dad as
his dad read the sports section ofthe papers.. He said be always wanted to read the paper
with his dad, but he could not because he did not know how to read.. A few weeks after
starting Alpha-Phonics, be entered the class one day and told me that as he was driving
down the road be began to sound out the words on the signs.. He was excited because he
was never able to do that before.
We had started Alpha-Phonics in October and the semester ended in December. I would
not be seeing the students anymore. We had completed about three-fourths of the book
and read the two novels. I would begin each class by doing about 15 minutes of Alpha-Phonics and then read from the novels. The students were eager and well behaved. The
youth who began reading the signs told me that in evening he could now sit with his dad
and read the sports section along with him. They would talk. about what they had read.
Three: Spanish-speaking students learned English this way
The following year, I tried another experiment. I had one student who was identified as
having ADD/ADHD. He was notorious. He was a ninth grader. This was his first year at
our school. I had another student who was in trouble with the dean’s office constantly. I
gave both of them Sam’s Blumenfeld Oral Reading Test (BORT), and they scored
between the 1st and 2 grade levels. I made an arrangement with other teachers to have
both students come to my class fifteen minutes while I did an Alpha-Phonics lesson
with them.
Because I began in August, I was able to finish the whole book with them by Christmas. I
gave both students the BORAT test. One boy had doubled his reading score and the
other was close behind him. The boy with ADD/ ADHD was never antsy or hyperactive
when he was working on the lessons. He was a completely different child when he was
with me. 1ndeed, his teacher would often allow him to stay the whole hour with me
because he bad many behavior problems in her class. He never bad a behavior problem
when working on Alpha-Phonics, neither did the other child who was constantly getting
into fights and being When these two youngsters worked on Alpha-Phonics
with me they were totally different children.
The following year, I worked with some other children. I had developed a system where I
would set aside ten minutes each class period and do a few lessons while the rest ofthe
class would work: quietly on their own at their desks. I would use the BORAT to identify
the illiterates in my class. I would then ask them if they bad ever had an A in English.
Invariably they would say, “‘No.” I would ask them if they would want one. They would
say, “Yes.” I then would say that all they had to do was work with me for ten minutes a
day on Alpha-Phonics until we were done with the book. When we were done with the
book, I would choose several pages at random for them to read from. If they could read
the pages to me., they would receive an A. I told them that that was all they had to worry
about in the class. I was not interested in what they did regarding the usual coursework..
That was the incentive I offered them. It was up to them.
One youth bad failed the ninth grade and was taking his ninth-grade English class over
again with me. He was also taking his tenth grade English class. His tenth grade class met
next door to mine first period. He would then come to my class second period. His tenth
grade teacher was the same one he took the year before, the class, which he bad failed. He
was working ten minutes a day on Alpha-Phonics for several weeks, when one day the
door that communicated between my room and the neighboring room opened. It was his
tenth grade teacher. She called me over to her and asked what it was I was doing with
him. I told her Alpha-Phonics. She said, “Look!” The whole class was watching Channel
One and chatting. It was during homeroom. The whole class, except this youth, who was
busy reading a book I had given him. The teacher was flabbergasted. She knew he was
illiterate and could not believe that be was able to read.
One day I was working with this boy at my desk when we had a new student enter the
class. He had just been released from a juvenile detention. He knew the youth I was
working with and sat by him as we worked together. He was curious about what we were
doing, and I explained it to him. He said that he could not read either. He explained that
he started having trouble reading in the third grade. He said that when the time came to
read aloud be would intentionally get into trouble so be would be sent to the office so that
he would not have to read. He could not take the embarrassment. He did not want anyone
to know that he could not read. The boy I was working with chimed in and said that he
was the same way. They both recounted events when they would get into trouble on
purpose so they could avoid reading. They wouJd even start fistfights. The boy who had
been in juvenile detention was sent there because be bad set fire to the junior high school
The following year I had finely established my regular ten-minute routine in my class,
and every year after- that I would have students who would participate. One year I was in a
staffing meeting for a boy who was labeled as a special education student with learning
disabilities. The special education staffer, whom I had never met before asked me what I
was doing with the boy. The reason she asked is that she was with the boy’s science
teacher when the science teacher had reported that the boy began volunteering to read
aloud. The science teacher was astonished. We live in a small community and the teacher
had known the boy ever since kindergarten and had known that he could not read, thus
the placement in the special education program: Here he was volunteering to read aloud
in her class. I told them what it was I was doing.
There is one case that haunts me. I had a big strapping youth who was seventeen years
old. He had failed ninth and tenth grade English because he could not read. He was in my
ninth grade English class. I had given him the BORAT test, and he was at about the 1-2
grade level. A typical case. We began working ten minutes a day. After a month I gave
him the book Sounder, and he told me he was reading it at home. We wen: about halfway
through the book when he no longer showed up in my class. I learned that he had moved
away. I do not know if he ever completely learned how to read. He was a decent well-mannered youth who would show up ever day, was polite and carried a big stack of books
with him. He was waiting for someone to teach him to read.
My daughter was born in 1996. I remember seeing the little girl read in the Hooked on
Phonics commercials and wished my daughter could read like her. When she was two, I
began to teach her how to read during my summer vacation. She would take naps then,
and I followed the advice in the teacher’s manual. I set up a routine. Every day, before she
took her nap, we would sit together. Following Sam’s advice, I appealed to her intellect. I
said, “”It is time for our lessons.” I began by following the alphabet pre-reading exercise in
the back ofthe book. Again, following Mr. Blumenfeld’s advice, I did not pressure her or
scold her, regardless ofher behavior. Some days, she wuuId kick at the book and giggle. I
would say, “You did a good job today!” And I put the book away. We would continue
tomorrow. It went on like this for several months.
When school started again, she would do the lessons with me before we went to bed. She
enjoyed the routine and the lessons. One evening, while my wife was in tbe room, she
took out the book on her own and began reading from lesson two: “Am, Sam, Hear the S
sound,” she said Then, – “Sam sat.” My wife could not believe it. “Did she
memorize those words?” She asked. “No,” l replied, and then explained the method.
When she was three, we were driving down the road when she said, “Look Momma,”
pointing to a sign, “‘Marshal’s, there is your store.” My wife could not believe it. When
she was three, there was one occasion when our daughter was at Sunday school. Her
teachers were arguing over whether or not she was reading the colors on the crayons..
‘”She’s memorized them,” said one. “‘No, she is reading them,” said the other. The colors
she was reading were purple~ fuchsia and magenta. Magenta was her favorite.
The spring before my daughter began kindergarten, she could read fluently any word in
front of her. We were at a spring festival when my daughter and her friend bought soft
drinks. My daughter” read the inside ofthe cap, whicb told whether or not you had won a
prize advertised on the side ofthe can. My daughter read the label effortlessly, which
included the words vacation and discovery. “‘She is a genius!” exclaimed the father.
My daughter’s friend asked her dad to read the soft drink label to her. I told the girl’s
father that his daughter could read as well if he used Alpha-Phonics with her. I said,
“‘Follow the lesson manual and be patient, do not pressure your child, as Mr. Blumenfeld
said and in a year or so she will be like my daughter.”
That fall I saw the girl’s parents and asked how she was doing. He said his daughter had
not really taken to the book yet. (His daughter” had just started kindergarten, as mine had.).
I said “be patient and keep going. ” Meanwhile, my daughter” was reading at 2nd grade
level; and during kindergarten reading time, she would go to a second grade class for
reading instruction. The following year I saw the girl’s dad again and asked him how she
was doing in first grade. He said that his daughter was reading at a second grade level and
was being tested for gifted and talented.
Meanwhile my daughter entered the first grade and soon afterwards was referred to the
gifted and talented program. She won the spelling bee and Math bash just as she did in
kindergarten. I used Samuel Blumenfeld’s How-to-Tutor to instruct her in math. In
second grade, she read at the seventh-grade level and won all of the reading, spelling and
math prizes and was elected to the school’s hall of fame. She has bad straight A’s in
every class. She learned to read with Alpha-Phonics and learned math with How-to-Tutor.
While my daughter was in first grade, I was asked to sit on a parent teacher committee.
While on the committee, the mayor of our town complained to the principal that be had
been on the committee for three years and that the committee was always talking about
doing something outside of the box when it came to improving the school’s reading
scores. Regardless of what the committee did to improve reading scores., they were
always the same. The principal said that he was open for suggestions outside of the box.
No one had any suggestions so I said that I was familiar with the method of reading
instruction in the public schools and that was what was at fault I said that I had a method
that worked better. Indeed, I said that I drop my daughter- off at school at 7:30, I could
walk into any class, give a ten-minute lesson and still arrive at the high school where I
teach in time to sign in a 8:00 am. I said that if anyone doubted me, I get a paycheck.
every two weeks with a comma in ii. ~ let’s put it on the table and keep the tourists out.” I
wanted to let them know my intentions were serious.
,
. They took me up on the offer, and a first-year teacher volunteered her class. I began the
first Monday after spring break. I only had six weeks to work with the children. I made
transparencies of the Alpha-Phonics lessons and followed the teacher’s manual. I only did
a ten-minute lesson. The teacher combined her bottom students with the reading
teacher’s bottom students. After two weeks, the mother of one of the children
approached me. She said, “‘I am glad you are working with my daughter. A while back the
school called me up to their office and told me there was something wrong with my
daughter. She bad a learning disability. I cried for two days,” she said. I told her not to
listen to anything the schools told her, to be patient and to watch what happens.
A week after school was over, I saw the mother again and I asked her how her daughter
was doing. She said that the school had called her up again and told her that they had
given her daughter an end of the year reading test showing that she had a 40%
improvement in her reading and they and were going to put her into an advanced class.
The following year, I was asked to do the project again with a first-grade class. I worked
ten minutes each morning. I was only able to complete three-fourths of the book. The
school’s diagnostic test revealed that of the children who were able to complete the
project successfully, not one had a reading disability. The makers of the diagnostic test
said that you could expect 20% of the children to have reading disabilities.
I once was explaining to a student why children have reading problems. When I finished,
a girl from the other side ofthe class, who I thought was not listening, said, “This is what
happened to my brother. He is in the fourth grade, hates to read and gets stomach aches
and headaches.” I told her that his troubles were over and gave her a copy of Alpha-Phonics. Four months later, I asked how was her brother doing. She said be completed
the book and reads just fine.
I had the same success with students in special education, who were labeled as
learning disabled or educatable mentally retarded. I have 100% per cent success with
every student. The only variable is the speed at which students progress. You must follow
Dr. Blumenfeld’s advice and be patient. Do not pressure the child.
I have many other- heartbreaking stories about children who have quit school because they
did not know how to read, and no one will teach them. I have had children take a copy of
Alpha-Phonics and keep it to teach friends they know, how to read. I encouraged
everyone to try Alpha-Phonics. The results you see in the child are truly miraculous.
It must be seen. to be believed.
(Copies of Alpha-Phonics can be ordered from Camp Constitution’s on-line book store: https://campconstitution.net/product/alpha-phonics-by-sam-blumenfeld/
And, the free on-line version with all 128 lessons in either video or audio: https://campconstitution.net/blumenfelds-alphaphonics/
The Weekly Sam: Sex Education and How It Got Into the Schools By Samuel L. Blumenfeld
The idea that people needed to be educated about sex probably began with the founding
of the birth control movement by Margaret Sanger, who launched a crusade early in the
20th Century to provide women with birth control information. It was Sanger’s work as a
visiting nurse that turned her interest to sex education and women’s health. Influenced
by anarchist Emma Goldman, she began to advocate the need for family limitation as a
means by which working-class women could liberate themselves from the burden of
unwanted pregnancy.
In 1914, Sanger published the first issue of The Woman Rebel, which advocated militant
feminism and the right to practice birth control. She also wrote a 16-page pamphlet,
Family Limitation, which provided explicit instructions on the use of contraceptive
methods. In August 1914, Sanger was indicted for violating postal obscenity laws. She
jumped bail in October and set sail for England.
In England she became acquainted with a number of British radicals, feminists, and neo-Malthusians whose social and economic theories helped her develop broader scientific
and social justifications for birth control. She was also deeply influenced by psychologist
Havelock Ellis and his theories on female sexuality and free love.
In 1915, Sanger returned to the United States. The government’s case against her was
dropped. In 1916, she opened the nation’s first birth control clinic in Brooklyn, New
York. After nine days of operation, the clinic was raided, and Sanger and staff were arrested. She spent 30 days in jail. However, the publicity surrounding the clinic
provided Sanger with a base of wealthy supporters from which she began to build an
organized birth control movement.
In 1917, Sanger published a new monthly, the Birth Control Review, and in 1921 she
embarked on a campaign to win mainstream support for birth control by founding the
American Birth Control League, the forerunner of Planned Parenthood. She focused her
efforts on gaining support from the medical profession, social workers, and the liberal
wing of the eugenics movement. Havelock Ellis had converted her to the eugenics creed.
She saw birth control as a means of reducing genetically transmitted mental or physical
defects, and supported sterilization for the mentally incompetent. She advocated “more
children for the fit, less from the unfit-that is the chief issue of birth control.”
In 1922, Sanger married oil magnate James Noah H. Slee, thus insuring her financial
independence. Slee, who died in 1943, became the main funder of the birth control
movement. By connecting with the eugenics movement, Sanger was able to gain the
backing of some of America’s wealthiest people.
In 1930, Sanger opened a fantily planning clinic in Harlem with the approval of the
Negro leadership, including communist W.E.B. DuBois. Beginning in 1939, DuBois also
served on the advisory council for Sanger’s ”Negro Project.” The financial support of
Albert and Mary Lasker made the project possible. In 1966, the year Sanger died, the
Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., said, “There is a striking kinship between our movement
and Margaret Sanger’s early efforts.”
From the end of World War II to the present, Planned Parenthood has become the world’s
largest enterprise promoting birth control and abortion. In 1960, the Food and Drug
Administration approved the sale of the birth control pill. In 1961 President Kennedy
defined population growth as a “staggering” problem and formerly endorsed reproductive
research to make new knowledge and methods available worldwide.
In 1961, a Conference on Religion and the Family brought together the medical director
of Planned Parenthood, the director of the National Council of Churches of Christ, and
the leader of the marriage counseling movement in the United States. Out of that meeting
came the idea for creating SIECUS, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of
the United States. It was Dr. Mary Calderone, one of the founders, who introduced the
concept of sexuality in 1964. It encompassed much more than the biological meaning of
sex. Thus, sexuality education replaced the term sex education to emphasize its more
comprehensive scope.
A SIECUS Report (Vol. 27, No.4) states: “In February 1999, SIECUS conducted a
public poll on our Internet site to ask the general public who had the greatest impact in
bringing about a positive change in the way America understands and affmns sexuality.
The top ten, chosen from a list of 100, were Judy Blume, Mary Calderone, Ellen
DeGeneres, Joycelyn Elders, Hugh Hefner, Anita Hill, Magic Johnson, Madonna, Gloria
Steinhem, and Ruth Westheirner. They represent diverse perspectives and views, and
each has helped American think about sexuality in a new and different way.”
Getting back to our chronology, in 1963, the U.N. General Assembly approved a
resolution on population growth and economic development. In that same year, the U.S.
government established the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
(NICHD). Part of its mandate was to support and oversee research in reproductive
science and contraceptive development.
In 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut ruled that
Connecticut’s law prohibiting the use of contraceptives by married couples violated a
newly defined right of marital privacy. As a result, ten states liberalized their family
planning laws and began to provide family planning services with tax funds.
In 1969 the National Association for Repeal of Abortion Laws, now known as the
National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, was founded.
In 1970, Congress enacted Title X of the Public Health Services Act, which provided
support and funding for family planning services and educational programs and for
biomedical and behavioral research in reproduction and contraceptive development. Title
X also authorized funding for a Center for Population Research within NICHD. This
marked the fust time Congress had ever voted for a separate authorization of family
planning services.
In that same year, New York state enacted the most progressive abortion law in the
nation, and Planned Parenthood of Syracuse, New York, became the fust affiliate to offer
abortion services.
In 1973, Humanist Manifesto II was published. It advocated a doctrine of sexual freedom
that clearly clashed with traditional views of sex. The Manifesto states: “In the area of
sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and
puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion,
and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating
forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction,
sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration
should not in themselves be considered ‘evil.’ Without countenancing mindless
pennissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one.
Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be
permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their life-styles as they desire ….
Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and
sexual maturity.” Among the signers of the Manifesto was Alan F. Guttmacher,
President of Planned Parenthood.
In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that the constitutional right of
privacy extended to a woman’s decision to have an abortion, thereby legalizing abortion
throughout the United States. In 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood of
Central Missouri v. Danforth struck down state requirements for parental and spousal
consent for abortion and set aside a state prohibition against saline abortions.
In 1976, the Alan Guttmacher Institute, named after Planned Parenthood’s president,
published 11 Million Teenagers, the first nationally distributed document to focus
attention on the problem of teen pregnancy and childbearing in the United States.
In 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court found the Massachusetts statute restricting minors’
access to abortion unconstitutional. It ruled that if states required minors to obtain
parental consent for an abortion, they must also give minors the alternative of obtaining
the consent of a judge, in confidential proceedings and without first notifying their
parents.
In 1981, the Alan Guttmacher Institute published Teenage Pregnancy: The Problem that
Hasn’t Gone Away, an analysis of teen sexuality, contraceptive knowledge and use, and
pregnancy experience. It emphasizes the need for making confidential contraceptive
services accessible to sexually active teens.
In 1982, Planned Parenthood published “Sexuality Alphabet,” as tool for sex education.
George Grant, in his book, Grand illusions, writes of this publication: “Planned
Parenthood’s sex education programs and materials are brazenly perverse. They are
frequently accentuated with crudely obscene four-letter words and illustrated by
explicitly ribald nudity. They openly endorse aberrant behavior-homosexuality,
masturbation, fornication, incest, and even bestiality-and then they describe that
behavior in excruciating detail.”
In 1953, staffer Lena Levine wrote in Planned Parenthood News: “Our goal is to be ready
as educators and parents to help young people obtain sex satisfaction before marriage.
By sanctioning sex before marriage, we will prevent fear and guilt.”
In 1985, the Alan Guttmacher Institute published its report on Teen Pregnancy in
Industrialized Countries, indicating that the u.S. teen pregnancy rate of 96 per 1,000 is
the highest in the developed world. A two-year study by the National Academy of
Sciences agreed with the AGI study and concluded that “prevention of adolescent
pregnancy should have the highest priority,” and “making contraceptive methods
available and accessible to those who are sexually active and encouraging them to
diligently use these methods is the surest major strategy for pregnancy prevention.”
In 1970, fewer than half of the nation’s school districts offered sex education curricula
and none had school-based birth control clinics. In 1998, more than seventy-five percent
of the districts teach sex education and there are more than one hundred clinics in
operation. Yet the percentage of illegitimate births has only increased during that time,
from a mere fifteen percent to an astonishing fifty-one percent. In California, the public
schools have required sex education for more than thirty years, and yet the state has
maintained one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in the nation. (Grant, p. 128)
Meanwhile, the AIDS epidemic, which began with eleven cases in 1979, had grown to
24,000 cases in 1986. In 1993, the number of cases was up to 339,250.
By 1987, Planned Parenthood had become the world’s largest non-government provider
of family planning services. It had also become politically active, joining more than 250
civil rights, civil liberties, religious, labor, education, legal, environmental, health, and
feminist groups that opposed the appointment of conservative Judge Robert Bork to the
U.S. Supreme Court.
(The above article was written in the mid 1990s before the promotion of “gender reassignment surgery” or it real term gender mutilation in the nation’s government schools. It was the acceptance of sex education being taught in government schools using the curriculum written by sex perverts that set the stage what we see today. Yes, there is something called a “slippery slope.”
Please visit the Sam Blumenfeld Archives, a free on-line resource for homeschoolers, teachers, historians, educators and those with an active intellect: http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/main.htm
Cinco de Mayo preceded by Dos de Mayo, Spain, Napoleon, Mexico, Maximillian, & Juárez – American Minute with Bill Federer
Napoleon made an alliance with the Muslim Ottoman Empire in 1806 and Persia in 1807.
Napoleon’s victories across Europe caused Spain’s King Charles IV to be unstable in his position regarding France:
- first against, 1793;
- then for, 1796;
- then against, 1803;
- then for, 1807.
In 1807, Napoleon finally invaded Spain, beginning the draining Peninsula War.
Frustrated Spanish citizens forced King Charles IV to abdicate on March 19, 1808, and replaced him with his son, King Ferdinand VII.
French troops proceeded to occupy of Madrid.
When Spaniards gathered in protest, Napoleon brought in the Muslim Mameluke cavalry to subdue them.
In 1808, on May 2, the “Dos de Mayo,” the Mamelukes charged on horseback brandishing their scimitar swords, slashing into the Spanish crowd.
Over 500 protestors were hacked to death, crushing the “Dos de Mayo Uprising.”
Immediately afterwards, on May 6, 1808, Napoleon forced King Ferdinand VII to abdicate.
Napoleon then installed his reluctant brother, Joseph Bonaparte, as the new King of Spain.
Spanish America questioned if it should remain loyal to the Spanish throne with the French brother of Napoleon on it.
Compounding the situation, New Spain was Catholic and Napoleon had been excommunicated by Pope Pius VII, June 10, 1809.
Soon, in 1810, Spanish America began to declare independence from French-controlled Spain.
Simon Bolivar led the revolution, which eventually gave independence to:
- Venezuela;
- Colombia; (which included Panama);
- Ecuador;
- Peru (with the help of Don José de San Martín); and
- Bolivia (named for him).
A Constitution was written, similar to that of the United States, to create a “Gran Columbia” of former Spanish States.
It fell apart when Simon Bolivar insisted on being president for life.
U.S. President William Henry Harrison referred to Simon Bolivar in his Inaugural Address, March 4, 1841:
“This is the old trick of those who would usurp the government of their country.
In the name of democracy they speak, warning the people against the influence of wealth and the danger of aristocracy.
History, ancient and modern, is full of such examples … Bolivar possessed himself of unlimited power with the title of his country’s liberator.”
The United State’s experience was different.
For a century and a half prior to independence citizens had been schooled by pastors and church leaders in self-government.
Simon Bolivar accused Spain of having kept the people of New Spain for centuries under a “triple yoke of ignorance, tyranny, and vice.”
As a result, in was therefore necessary that any new government “will require an infinitely firm hand.”
In Mexico, September 16, 1810, a priest named Miguel Hidalgo, gave a speech, “The Cry of Dolores,” calling people to revolt against the Napoleon-controlled Spanish elites.
Hidalgo gathered nearly 90,000 poor farmers.
Unfortunately, they were quickly defeated by the Spanish trained military at the Battle of Calderon Bridge in 1811.
Hidalgo was executed.
The Revolution continued, though, until Spanish General Agustín de Iturbide switched sides.
With his leadership, Mexico soon gained independence in 1821.
Unfortunately, rather than setting up a constitutional republic, like the United States, Agustín de Iturbide set up a Mexican Empire with himself ruling as the Emperor.
In 1824, Mexico adopted a Constitution.
In the following decades, Mexico struggled through the instability of 50 different governments.
Santa Anna rose to power.
In his 40 year career, called by some historians the Age of Santa Anna, he ruled as Mexico’s President for 12 non-consecutive terms.
He finally laid aside Mexico’s Constitution and made himself a despotic dictator.
Santa Anna told the U.S. minister to Mexico Joel R. Poinsett:
“A hundred years to come my people will not be fit for liberty …
A despotism is the proper government for them, but there is no reason why it should not be a wise and virtuous one.”
Modeling himself after Napoleon, he called himself “The Napoleon of the West.”
Santa Anna crushed dissent, resulting in Texas declaring independence in 1836:
“The late changes made in the government by General Antonio Lopez Santa Anna,
who having overturned the constitution of his country, now offers, as the cruel alternative, either abandon our homes … or submit to the most intolerable of all tyranny.”
General Santa Anna led the Mexican military, losing the Mexican-American War, 1846-1848, resulting in the Mexican Cession, 1848, and Gadsden Purchase, 1854.
In 1853, Santa Anna exiled a young leader who challenged his power — Benito Juárez.
The next year, Benito Juárez returned to led the Revolution of Ayutla, ousting Santa Anna.
An aspect of Mexican politics involved the Church.
Originally, the Catholic Church in Latin America saw its political responsibility as limited to being a conscience to the ruling elites, reminding them to treat the poor fairly as someday they too will face judgement.
Revolutionaries, though, wanted immediate change, and therefore accused the Church as being somehow complicit in maintaining the status quo.
In 1856, Benito Juárez, backed by Freemason leaders, led a War of Reform against the Church.
Religious orders were suppressed, church property was confiscated and religious clergy were denied rights.
Once he became President, Benito Juárez stopped paying interest on Mexico’s debt to Spain, Great Britain and France in 1861.
This resulted in those European countries planning an invasion of Mexico.
With the United States occupied in a Civil War, French troops landed in Mexico in 1862, actually being supported by various Mexican financial leaders and church leaders.
On MAY 5, 1862 – “CINCO DE MAYO” – the French Army suffered a minor setback at the Battle of Puebla.
The French went on to capture:
- Mexico City,
- Guadalajara,
- Zacatecas.
- Acapulco.
- Durango,
- Sinaloa and
- Jalisco.
It is speculated that had the French not experienced the set-back of the Battle of Puebla, they would have taken Mexico sooner, and been in a position to alter the America Civil War by supplying arms to the Confederacy.
Numerous Mexican leaders traveled to Europe to plead with Maximillian I to come to Mexico and restore order, to which he agreed in 1863.
Maximillian was the younger brother of Emperor Franz Joseph I, one of the world’s most powerful leaders.
Franz Joseph ruled the Austro-Hungarian Empire — which, after Russia, was the largest empire in Europe, consisting of:
- Austria,
- Hungary,
- Bohemia (Czech),
- Croatia,
- Poland,
- Slovenia,
- Slovakia,
- Bosnia,
- Herzegovina, and
- parts of Serbia, Romania, Italy, Montenegro, and Ukraine.
Emperor Franz Joseph ruled for almost 68 years, making him one of the longest reigning monarchs in history.
In 1910, Theodore Roosevelt met him.
In 1914, Emperor Franz Joseph’s nephew, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, was assassinated, starting World War I.
Franz Joseph’s younger brother, Maximillian, was known for being a forward thinker with liberal ideas, advocating progressive reforms in favor of common people.
He spoke six languages and was commander of the Austrian Navy, sending out the first Austrian ship to circumnavigate the globe.
Maximillian was supported in going to Mexico by England’s Queen Victoria and France’s Napoleon III, along with the blessing of Pope Pius IX,
He had the backing of many Mexican leaders, led by José Pablo Martínez del Río.
Maximillian arrived at Veracruz on May 21, 1864, to enthusiastic crowds.
He created an avenue through the center of Mexico City, known now as the famous boulevard Paseo de la Reforma.
Maximillian’s wife, Carlota, was shocked by the living conditions of the lower classes, so she raised money from wealthy Mexicans to help poor houses.
Maximilian immediately abolished child labor and reduced working hour for laborers.
He canceled all debts for peasants over 10 pesos, restored communal property and broke the monopoly of Hacienda stores.
He forbade all forms of corporal punishment and decreed that poor people could no longer be bought and sold for the price of their debt.
To the dismay of the wealthy, Maximilian upheld liberal policies of land reforms, religious freedom, and extended the right to vote beyond the landholding class.
The United States Government did not want European powers in the western hemisphere, as stated in the Monroe Doctrine.
The U.S. put diplomatic pressure on Napoleon III to abandon support of Maximillian and withdraw French troops from Mexico.
Lincoln instructed General Grant to send the order to Sheridan:
“Concentrate in all available points in the States an army strong enough to move against the invaders of Mexico.”
The U.S. secretly supplied guns to Mexican gangs, conveniently “losing” arms and ammunition at El Paso del Norte near the Mexican border.
General Philip Sheridan wrote in his journal:
“We continued supplying arms and munitions to the liberals, sending as many as 30,000 muskets from Baton Rouge alone.”
With the threat of a possible U.S. invasion in support of Benito Juárez, the supporters of Maximilian began to abandon him.
Maximillian’s wife, Carlota, went to Europe desperate for help but was denied everywhere and suffered an emotional collapse.
Napoleon III urged Maximillian to flee Mexico, but he refused to desert his Mexican followers, fearing the fate they would suffer.
He let his followers decide whether or not he should abdicate.
Faithful Mexican generals Miguel Miramon, Leonardo Márquez, and Tomás Mejía fought with an army of 8,000 Mexican loyalists.
In 1867, they withdrew to Santiago de Querétaro, but Colonel Miguel López was bribed to open a gate to let a raiding party in.
Maximilian was captured.
Leaders around the world begged Benito Juárez to spare Maximillian’s life.
Italy’s reformer, Giuseppe Garibaldi, sent telegrams to Benito Juárez on behalf of Maximillian.
Even eminent French author Victor Hugo, author of Les Misérables and The Hunchback of Notre-Dame, pleaded for Maximillian’s life.
Benito Juárez refused and had Maximillian shot on June 19, 1867.
He even photographed him in his coffin.
Maximillian’s last words were:
“I forgive everyone, and I ask everyone to forgive me.
May my blood which is about to be shed, be for the good of the country. Viva Mexico, viva la independencia!”
Benito Juárez died of a heart attack five years later, after putting down a revolt led by a young leader who challenged his power — Porfirio Diaz.
Porfirio Diaz was President till there was another revolt led by a young leader who challenged his power named Francisco Madero.
Madero was murdered in a coup d’Etat in 1913 by Victoriano Huerta, which started another civil war.
A quote contrasting the stability of the United States with that of other countries was made by 13th President Millard Fillmore, December 6, 1852:
“Our grateful thanks are due to an all-merciful Providence …
Our own free institutions were not the offspring of our Revolution. They existed before.
They were planted in the free charters of self-government under which the English colonies grew up …
… (Other) nations have had no such training for self-government, and every effort to establish it by bloody revolutions has been, and must without that preparation continue to be, a failure.
Liberty unregulated by law degenerates into anarchy, which soon becomes the most horrid of all despotisms …
We owe these blessings, under Heaven, to the happy Constitution and Government which were bequeathed to us by our fathers, and which it is our sacred duty to transmit in all their integrity to our children.”
(Reposted with permission with American Minute https://americanminute.com/ )
The Weekly Sam: Book Proposal by Samuel L. Blumenfeld Is Your Child Attending a Zoo? Or, How to Evaluate Your Child’s School
Sam had dozens of book proposals and man of they were incorporated into other. Here is just one of them:
Introduction: One of the most important decisions parents must make is choosing a
school for their child. For most parents, the choice is pretty limited to the public school a child is
assigned to. In some communities, parents do have a choice among schools. But how are parents
to know which school is the best one? What should they look for? What kind of questions should
they ask? This book will help parents evaluate a school so that they can make a decision based on
personal observation and objective information.
Chapter One:
Where do we start? First you must find out if the school has a well-articulated philosophy of education that determines what is taught and how it is taught. You must
find out if the school operates within the framework of a mandated reform program assisted by the
federal government, requiring a specific fonn of curriculum. If this is the case, then the purpose of
the school is to serve the needs of the government ratber than the needs of your child. If the
schools in your town are so conducted, then you may want to consider a private school or
homeschooling. Government directed school reforms will be discussed in a later chapter.
Chapter Two:
The physical environment. Whether parents know it or not, the
physical environment of a building and classroom can have a positive or negative effect on the
child. The parent must ask: Would I enjoy being in this building or classroom six hours a day, five
days a week, for a whole school year? Is tbe atmosphere in this classroom conducive to learning
or is there too much noise and distraction? Ask for permission to actually sit in a classroom for an
hour or two to see what goes on among the students and how the teacher handles the kids.
The seating arrangement is also important. If the children are seated in rows and the teacher
is the focus of attention in front of the class, then the class will probably be conducted in a
traditional manner. If the children are seated behind little tables grouped together so that they can
openly socialize and do group work then the class will be conducted along “progressive” lines.
Because there is significant difference between the traditional and the progressive models, a
parent should know which model the school has adopted. Some schools try to combine both
models. The school you’re looking at may be one of those.
Chapter Three:
The Traditional Model. What is its philosophical basis? The emphasis
is usually on teaching academic skills, maintaining classroom discipline, sometimes having a dress
code, using textbooks, teaching subject matter as separate disci plines. In the kindergarten and
primary grades reading is usually taught with phonics, and arithmetic is learned primarily by rote
memorization. Few public schools today adhere to the traditional model. To find that model,
parents may have to consider private alternatives. The advantage of the traditional model is that
children learn their basics pretty well and student behavior is well controlled.
Chapter Four: The Progressive Model. Most schools today have adopted the
progressive model of education. You will know it the moment you enter a first-grade classroom.
The children will be seated around tables, chatting or working in groups. The walls will be
decorated with all sorts of posters, pictures of animals, etc. The teacher will not be the focus of
attention. She is now a facilitator. Occasionally she will read to a group of kids seated on the floor
and will have a dicussion with them. Her teaching program usually includes whole-language,
invented spelling, the new math, etc. Subject matter will be interdisciplinary. The atmosphere may
seem chaotic, but it is believed that each child is learning on his or her own. The advantage of this
model is its informality and general permissiveness.
Chapter Five:
Teachers. When you put a child in a school you are entrusting that child
to a complete stranger. Most parents assume that their child’s teacher is qualified and certified. But
experience, sometimes painful, has taught us that some of today’s teachers may not only be
incompetent, but also immoral. How can parents know what kind of individual is their child’s
teacher? If possible, get background information on the faculty: colleges attended, degrees earned.
If the school does not have such information, you might talk with the teacher and elicit the
information you want in a chatty, friendly, non-threatening way.
Chapter Six:
Teaching Reading. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
That certainly applies to the field of reading instruction. Faulty teaching methods can cause reading
problems, and it behooves parents to find out how reading is being taught in the school. This
chapter will explain the various ways reading is being taught, how to evaluate different programs
and what questions to ask. Although educators have declared that the reading war between
phonics and whole language is over, it is doubtful that it really is. Thus, it is most important to
know what to look for in a school’s reading program.
Chapter Seven:
Writing and Spelling. You would think that such subjects would be
taught in a way that would virtually satisfy all parents. Unfortunately, that is not the case. One of
the questions most often asked by parents is how to improve an older child’s spelling. More often
than not that child was taught writing by the invented spelling method, which, unfortunately,
creates spelling problems. Again, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. If you teach
spelling in a logical, rational way, you can avoid developing bad spelling habits. Also, find out
how your child will be taught to write: cursive first or print first? The proper sequence makes all
the difference.
Chapter Eight:
Math. Millions of children emerge from our schools with poor
mathematical skills. Usually the problem can be traced back to the first and second grades and
how the child was taught arithmetic. Again, prevention can guard your child against mathematical
dysfunction. There are good ways and bad ways to teach arithmetic. This chapter will help
parents recognize the good and the bad ways.
Chapter Nine:
The new federally mandated curriculum. Most parents are not aware of
the sweeping reforms that are being implemented in schools across the nation. These radical
changes may persuade you to seek alternatives for your children. The new curriculum is the result
of three important pieces of legislation passed by Congress in 1994: Goals 2000; School-to-Work
Opportunities Act; and the Improving America’s Schools Act. It is important for parents to
understand the ramifications of these acts. They are changing the goals of schooling and what
children are to be taught. They also include gathering extensi ve personal data about your child
which will become a permanent record in a federal computer in Washington.
Chapter Ten:
Music, Art, and Foreign Language. Most parents want their children to
be exposed to the arts and some study of music. Does the school teach art? Does the school teach
children to play musical instruments? If not, does it at least teach music appreciation? Does the
school have a band or a chorus? Foreign language is another way of expanding a child’s cultural
horizons. Find out what languages the school offers. For some parents, cultural education is an
important way to instill love and appreciation of the arts and reading. It provides nourishment for
the soul. If a school is deficient in this area, you may not want to put your child there.
Chapter Eleven: Computers in the classroom. Is the school technologically up to date?
About the Author
Samuel L. Blumenfeld has written ten books on education, including:
The New Illiterates
How to Tutor
Alpha-Phonics: A Primer for Beginning Readers
Homeschooling: A Parents Guide to Teaching Children
He is considered one of the world’s top authorities on reading.
He has lectured in all fifty states as well as in Canada, Australia,
and New Zealand.
He is very well known among homeschoolers and has spoken at many
homeschool conventions over the last fifteen years.
Dr. Blumenfeld also edited The Blumenfeld Education Letter for ten
years, keeping a close watch on the growing illiteracy problem.
He presently is a columnist for World Net Daily and several other
internet websites and writes regularly for Practical Homeschooling.
Prior to becoming a full-time writer, Dr. Blumenfeld was an editor
in the book publishing industry in New York.
He worked at Rinehart & Company, The Viking Press, The World
Publishing Company, and Grosset & Dunlap.
He decided to write this book after reading an article about Tom
Cruise’s struggle to learn to read. Tom says:
“When I was about 7 years old, I had been labeled dyslexic. I’d try to
concentrate on what I was reading, then I’d get to the end of the page
and have very little memory of anything I’d read. I would go blank,
feel anxious, nervous, bored, frustrated, dumb. I would get angry. My
legs would actually hurt when I was studying. My head ached. All
through school and well into my career, I felt like I had a secret.”
Tom was a victim of the faulty teaching methods in his school. Had
his parents known how he was being taught at school, his years of
agony and failure could have been avoided.
The Weekly Sam: Why the Federal Government Should Get Out of Education By Samuel L. Blumenfeld
The real issue is Limited Government versus Unlimited Government.
Most Americans want less government, smaller government and lower taxes. The only
way to accomplish this is by abolishing federal departments and bureaucracies. As far
back as the Reagan administration, Republicans promised to abolish the Department of
Education. They couldn’t do it then because they lacked a majority in Congress. But
whatever happened to the plan to abolish the Department of Education when Republicans
became the majority? Not only did they forget their promise, but in September 1996 they
passed the single largest increase in federal education funding: $3.5 billion. Who were
the Republicans trying to impress? The National Education Association?
The basic question is: Can good education be provided in the U.S. without the help or
intrusion of the federal government? The answer is clearly yes. In fact, there is ample
evidence indicating that the present decline in educational quality is a direct result of
federal funding which has been used by the educators to fund more and more expensive
educational malpractice.
A little historical background will help us understand why the federal role in education in
America is more of an aberration than a natural development. There is no mention of
education in the U.S. Constitution. However, in 1785 and 1787, while the United States
were still under the Articles of Confederation, the Continental Congress passed the
Northwest Ordinance Acts which provided for the orderly settlement of the Northwest
Territory and encouraged the establishment of schools in the territory by stating:
“Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the
happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall be encouraged.” The
new states were required to set aside the 16th section of each township to be used for
educational purposes. But there was no requirement that the schools be government
owned and operated.
Seventy-five years later, in 1862, Congress passed and President Lincoln signed the
Morrill Land Grant Act providing each loyal state with 30,000 acres of land for each
Senator and Representative, the land to be used for agricultural and mechanical schools
under a measure proposed by Senator Justin S. Morrill of Vermont. Five years later, in
1867, a federal Office of Education was established. Its purpose was:
“To collect such statistics and facts as shall show the condition and progress of education in the
several States and Territories, and to diffuse such information respecting the organization and
management of schools and school systems, and methods of teaching as shall aid the People of
the United States in the establishment and maintenance of efficient school systems, and
otherwise promote the cause of education throughout the country.”
It should be noted that the National Education Association had been founded ten years
earlier in 1857 and that its members called for the establishment of a federal department
of education at the founding convention. And it is obvious that in that statement of
purpose was an expansionist view of the government’s future role in education.
After World War I, the NEA began a long range campaign to get federal aid for public
education. From 1867 to 1940–a period of 73 years–the Congress passed about 11 minor
pieces of legislation related to education. The fear of federal control of schools kept most
legislators from voting for federal aid to public education. But resistance was gradually
broken down by such acts as the National School Lunch Act of 1946, the School Milk
Program Act of 1954.
But it was the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 passed during the
Johnson administration which opened the floodgates of the U.S. Treasury for the benefit
of the education establishment. From 1965 to 1983–18 years–there were 43 education
acts passed by the Congress, including the establishment in 1979 of a U.S. Department of
Education with cabinet status. In the year 1994 alone, there were about 180 educational
restructuring bills before Congress! The three most important bills enacted were the
Goals 2000 Act, the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, and the Improving America’s
Schools Act, a reauthorization of the ESEA of 1965. All of this legislation was passed
with much Republican help. In short, the Congress launched an avalanche of bills which
virtually amounted to a cultural revolution.
It seemed as if all restraints had been removed on government expansion and intrusion
into education, and the Republican Congress did nothing to reverse the trend. That is
why the federal government has become a government of unlimited power.
We must return to the principle of limited government if we wish to reduce the cost of
government and its unwarranted intrusion in the education of our children. A limited
federal government does only those things that cannot be done by the states or the private
sector. The purpose of taxes is to pay for government not change society.
There is no doubt that the federal intrusion in education has harmed education and
produced the dumbing down effect. Test scores attest to this bizarre phenomenon. Since
1962, SAT verbal scores have declined despite billions of federal dollars pumped into
public education. In September 1993, the U.S. Department of Education revealed that
some 90 million adult Americans have grossly inadequate reading and writing skills,
despite compulsory school attendance. The more federal money Congress pumps into
education the worse it gets. Why? Because educational malpractice is very expensive,
and without federal funding we’d have much less of it.
The simple truth is that federal education programs cost the taxpayers billions of dollars,
yet not one of these programs has actually improved education. Claims have been made
that Headstart is a successful program. But research indicates that whatever gains
children make in Headstart are lost by the third grade.
Federal education grants subsidize a liberal academic elite with its secular humanist,
socialist agenda, thus violating the Constitutional prohibition against establishing a state
religion: Humanism.
The Data Collection System of the National Center for Education Statistics threatens
family privacy and freedom. Children are not a “national resource” to be monitored and
controlled for use by the state or industry. They are individuals whose lives belong to
themselves, not to “the economy.”
The federal government has institutionalized educational malpractice by supporting
unsound educational theories and practices which have found their way into the public
schools via the federally funded National Diffusion Network. Federal aid to public
education simply reinforces a socialist, government owned and operated education system
which distorts market values and encourages monopoly union practices.
Meanwhile, the education establishment continues to grow and prosper. In 1982, the
average public school teacher’s salary was $19,274. In 1995 it was up to $37,643., and in
2008 it us up to $47,602. In 1982, per pupil expenditure was $2,726. In 1995-96 the
national average was up to $6,213, and in 2009 it was up to $9,963. In 1984, total
expenditure for public education was $134.5 billion. In 2002 it had risen to $420 billion.
In short, never has public education been more generously supported by the taxpayer and
never have our schools seen more violence, academic disarray, and parental
dissatisfaction than the present. What is even more shocking is that over four million
students must be drugged daily with Ritalin in order to be able to attend class.
Today, well-connected change agents like Mark Tucker are busy imposing on America
the new Human Resources Development System, exuberantly described by Tucker in an
18-page letter to Hillary Clinton when her husband was elected President. Tucker
described his system as “a seamless web of opportunities to develop one’s skills that
literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone–young and old,
poor and rich, worker and full-time student.”
And so, in place of academic excellence, we have Outcome Based Education, Whole
Language, Multiculturalism, Skinnerian Mastery Learning, National Teaching Standards
and Certification, School-Based Clinics, Attitude Assessments, Global Citizenship, and
Socialized Medicine for every student.
What is actually taking place is a cultural revolution engineered by behavioral
psychologists, hwnanist educators, and socialist change agents using a whole galaxy of
education programs to implement their agenda, fmanced by the federal government.
And much of this has taken place when Republicans were in control of Congress. And
that accounts for the extreme frustration of conservatives who vote Republican but get
liberal results. When will this change?
The takeover of the White House and the federal government by radical leftists has finally
awakened the American people to what has happened to this country since we started
allowing the federal government to exceed all limits placed on it by the Constitution. But
in order to succeed in restoring the principles of government held by our founding fathers,
we must return to limited government. This can only be done if the American people
realize the potential for tyranny inherent in a government education system.
The most important institution in a socialist state is a government owned and controlled
school system wherein children can be indoctrinated to accept a socialist way of life. And
the best way to prevent this from occurring is to return to the concept of educational
freedom in which the federal government has no role in education.
Local public schools can easily become private institutions governed by local trustees and
supported by tuition fees. This would greatly reduce the tax burden on home owners and
provide more than enough resources to pay for the tuitions of poor families. The costs of
education would decrease dramatically since education would once more become reality
based wherein the fundamental academic subjects would be taught without the added
costs of educational malpractice. Individual intelligence would be enhanced, while
collectivist group-think would be discarded.
Can this be done? Only if America’s conservative leaders demand that it should be done.
The home-school movement has already proven that parents can actually teach better
than our high-priced professionals, that children progress better academically when taught
at home, and that the cost of educating a child at home is less than $1,000 a year.
If Americans want to once more experience what it means to be free, they must burst out
of the high-priced straitjacket imposed on them by the socialist education tyrants. If they
want better education at lower cost, then the prescription for success is simple: get the
government out of education.
The above article was written more than 20 years ago. Please visit and subscribe to the Sam Blumenfeld Archives: https://campconstitution.net/sam-blumenfeld-archive/
Lexington & Concord, and the Right to Keep & Bear Arms “To Disarm the People is the Best Way to Enslave Them”-George Mason – American Minute with Bill Federer
The sun never set on the British Empire.
It was the largest empire in world history.
Out of nearly 200 countries in the world, only 22 were never controlled, invaded or attacked by Britain.
In April of 1775, the British Royal Military Governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, sent 800 British Army Regulars, under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Francis Smith, on a preemptive raid to seize guns from American patriots at Lexington and Concord.
George Mason of Virginia stated:
“To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
A warning was sent from Boston’s Old North Church that the British were coming, as recounted in Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem, “Paul Revere’s Ride”:
“Listen my children and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere,
On the 18th of April, in 75;
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year.
… He said to his friend, ‘If the British march
By land or sea from the town to-night,
Hang a lantern aloft in the belfry arch
Of the North Church tower as a signal light …
One if by land, and two if by sea;
And I on the opposite shore will be,
Ready to ride and spread the alarm
Through every Middlesex village and farm,
For the country folk to be up and to arm …
Through the gloom and the light,
The fate of a nation was riding that night;
And the spark struck out by that steed, in his flight.”
Paul Revere was captured along the way, but William Dawes and Dr. Samuel Prescott continued the midnight ride.
Revere wrote:
“About 10 o’clock, Dr. Warren sent in great haste for me, and begged that I would immediately set off for Lexington, where Messrs. Hancock & Adams were …
I got a horse of Deacon Larkin … and set off … It was then about 11 o’clock … After I had passed Charlestown Neck … I saw two men on horseback … When I got near them, I discovered they were British officers.
One tried to get a head of me, and the other to take me. I turned my horse very quick, and galloped … to Medford Road.
The one who chased me, endeavoring to cut me off, got into a clay pond, near where the new tavern is now built. I got clear of him …
I went through Medford, over the bridge, and up to Menotomy … I alarmed almost every house, till I got to Lexington …”
Revere continued:
“I … mentioned, that we had better alarm all the inhabitants till we got to Concord; the young Doctor much approved of it …
We had got nearly half way.
Mr. Dawes and the Doctor stopped to alarm the people of a house: I was about one hundred rods a head, when I saw two men … in an instant I was surrounded by four …
The Doctor being foremost, he came up; and we tried to get past them; but they being armed with pistols and swords, they forced us in to the pasture; -the Doctor jumped his horse over a low stone wall, and got to Concord …
Six officers, on horseback … ordered me to dismount … He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the affirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston …
Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, clapped his pistol to my head … and told me he was going to ask me some questions, and if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out.”
In a related story, four months earlier, on December 13, 1774, two British warships set sail for Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to seize gunpowder and weapons patriots had taken from Fort William and Mary.
Riding all night to warn the citizens of Portsmouth that the British were coming were Paul Revere and 29-year-old African American Wentworth Cheswell.
Cheswell was constable of Newmarket, New Hampshire, being considered the first African American elected to public office in U.S. history.
Paul Revere also described a spy, Dr. Benjamin Church, who leaked patriot plans to British General Gates before the Battle of Lexington:
“Dr. Church … appeared to be a high son of Liberty. He frequented all the places where they met …
I came across Deacon Caleb Davis. … He told me, that the morning Dr. Church went into Boston … General Gage and Dr. Church came out of a room, discoursing together, like persons who had been long acquainted.
He appeared to be quite surprised at seeing Deacon Davis there …
I was told by another person … that he saw Church go in to General Gage’s House … that he got out of the carriage and went up the steps more like a man that was acquainted …
He did not doubt that Church was in the interest of the British; and that it was he who informed General Gage … that a short time before the Battle of Lexington … Church had no money … and all at once, he had several hundred New British Guineas.”
On April 19th, “Patriots’ Day,” the British continued their march to Lexington and Concord intent on seizing arms and arresting Tea Party leader Samuel Adams and Massachusetts Provincial Congress president John Hancock.
On the way, the British passed through Arlington, Massachusetts.
They stormed the inn where lodged the patriots Elbridge Gerry, Azor Orne and Jeremiah Lee, who was America’s largest colonial ship owner and the wealthiest man in Massachusetts.
Jeremiah Lee was using his ships to smuggle in supplies to the patriots.
When the British stormed the inn, Gerry, Orne and Lee fled wearing only their night clothes and hid, laying on the cold ground in a wet cornfield for hours.
Jeremiah Lee caught a pneumonia and died a few weeks later.
John Hancock had previously experienced British tax collectors confiscating his merchant ship Liberty in 1768
Hancock had declared to the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, April 15, 1775:
“In circumstances dark as these, it becomes us, as men and Christians, to reflect that, whilst every prudent measure should be taken to ward off the impending judgments …
a day … be set apart as a Day of Public Humiliation, Fasting and Prayer … to confess their sins … to implore the Forgiveness of all our Transgression.”
Connecticut Governor Jonathan Trumbull, whom Washington called ‘the first of the patriots’, was the only colonial governor at the start of the Revolution to support the patriot cause.
Trumbull proclaimed a Day of Fasting, April 19, 1775, that:
“God would graciously pour out His Holy Spirit on us to bring us to a thorough repentance and effectual reformation that our iniquities may not be our ruin;
that He would restore, preserve and secure the liberties of this and all the other British American colonies, and make the land a mountain of Holiness, and habitation of righteousness forever.”
As the sun rose, April 19, 1775, there were 800 British regulars approaching Lexington’s town green.
To their surprise, they were met by Lexington’s militia, comprised of 77 men who were mostly members of the Church of Christ, pastored by Rev. Jonas Clark, whose wife was a cousin of John Hancock.
Patriot captain John Parker told the militia:
“Stand your ground; don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have War, let it begin here!”
It is disputed who fired first, but the British opened fire and killed or wounded eighteen of Captain Parker’s men.
In his sermon preached a year later, April 19, 1776, Pastor Jonas Clark described:
“Under cover of the darkness, a brigade of these instruments of violence and tyranny, made their approach …
They enter this town … like murders and cut-throats … without provocation, without warning, when no war was proclaimed, they draw the sword of violence, upon the inhabitants of this town,
and with a cruelty and barbarity, which would have made the most hardened savage blush, they shed INNOCENT BLOOD! …”
Pastor Clark continued:
“And the names of Munroe, Parker, and others, that fell victims to the rage of blood-thirsty oppressors, on that gloomy morning …
And from the nineteenth of April, 1775, we may venture to predict, will be dated, in future history, THE LIBERTY or SLAVERY of the AMERICAN WORLD, according as a sovereign God shall see fit to smile, or frown upon the interesting cause, in which we are engaged.”
The American militia retreated, growing to number 400, and took a stand at Concord’s Old North Bridge.
The British fired first, wounding four and killing two.
Militia commander John Buttrick yelled:
“Fire, for God’s sake, fellow soldiers, fire!”
Taking many casualties, the British began a hasty retreat 20 miles back to Boston, being ambushed along the way by John Parker’s militia in “Parker’s Revenge.”
Tragically, in the anger of their retreat, the British shot or bayoneted almost everyone in the town of Menotomy.
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow continued his poem:
“You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,—
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.”
Longfellow ended:
“So through the night rode Paul Revere;
And so through the night went his cry of alarm
To every Middlesex village and farm,—
A cry of defiance, and not of fear,
A voice in the darkness, a knock at the door,
And a word that shall echo for evermore!
For, borne on the night-wind of the Past,
Through all our history, to the last,
… In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
The people will waken and listen to hear
The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
And the midnight message of Paul Revere.”
Though it took eight long years, Americans won their independence.
A century later, on April 19, 1875, at that same Old North Bridge, patriots were honored by the dedication of the “Minute Man Statue” designed by Daniel Chester French.
On the statue’s base is a stanza of the poem The Concord Hymn, written Ralph Waldo Emerson, April 19, 1860:
“By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled;
Here once the embattled farmers stood;
And fired the shot heard round the world.
The foe long since in silence slept;
Alike the conqueror silent sleeps,
And time the ruined bridge has swept,
Down the dark stream that seaward creeps.
… On this green bank, by this soft stream,
We place with joy a votive stone,
That memory may their deeds redeem,
When, like our sires, our sons are gone.
O Thou who made those heroes dare,
To die, and leave their children free,
Bid time and nature gently spare,
The shaft we raised to them and Thee.”
Two months after the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the Continental Congress, under President John Hancock, declared, June 12, 1775:
“Congress … considering the present critical, alarming and calamitous state … do earnestly recommend … a Day of Public Humiliation, Fasting and Prayer,
that we may with united hearts … confess and deplore our many sins and offer up our joint supplications to the All-wise, Omnipotent and merciful Disposer of all Events, humbly beseeching Him to forgive our iniquities …
It is recommended to Christians of all denominations to assemble for public worship and to abstain from servile labor and recreations of said day.”
The Revolutionary War began with an attempt by government officials to seize citizens’ guns.
Patriots had prepared for this with the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, October 26, 1774, organizing their defenses with one-third of their regiments being “Minutemen,” men who were ready to fight at a minute’s notice.
This idea came from the Bible, where in Ancient Israel every man was armed and ready to defend his family and community:
David B. Kopel wrote in “Ancient Hebrew Militia Law” (Denver University Law Review, July 15, 2013):
“New Englanders intensely self-identified with ancient Israel … Thus, ancient Hebrew militia law is part of the intellectual background of the American militia system, and of the Second Amendment …
Every male ‘from the age of twenty years up, all those in Israel who are able to bear arms’ … were obliged to fight, to go forth ‘armed to battle.’
Men who failed this duty ‘sinned against the Lord.'”
E.C. Wines wrote in Commentaries on the Laws of the Ancient Hebrews, 1853 (NY: Geo. P. Putnam & Co., 1853):
“Moses’ constitution made no provision for a standing army …
The whole body of citizens … formed a national guard.”
- “Thus says the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side” (Exodus 32:27);
- “They all hold swords, being expert in war: every man hath his sword upon his thigh” (Song of Solomon 3:8);
- “Every one with one of his hands wrought in the work, and with the other hand held a weapon. For the builders, every one had his sword girded by his side (Nehemiah 4:17-18).
James Madison wrote (Letters & Writings of James Madison, 1865, p. 406):
“The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprise of ambition …
Kingdoms of Europe … are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
Noah Webster wrote in An Examination into the leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787:
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.
The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword because the whole body of the people are armed.”
Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote in Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833 (2nd Edition, 1833, p. 125):
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium (safeguard) of the liberties of a Republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers.”
Machiavelli wrote in The Prince (trans. L. Ricci, 1952, p. 73, 81):
“An armed republic submits less easily to the rule of one of its citizens.”
Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Cooley wrote in The General Principles of Constitutional Law, 1891 (2nd Ed., 1891, p. 282):
“The Second Amendment … was meant to be a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers …
The people … shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose.”
Patrick Henry, the five-time Governor of the State of Virginia, wrote (Elliott, ed., The Debates in the Several State Conventions, 1836, 1941, p. 378):
“Let him candidly tell me, where and when did freedom exist when the sword and the purse were given up from the people?
No nation ever retained its liberty after the loss of the sword and the purse …
The great object is, that every man be armed … Everyone who is able may have a gun.”
Joel Barlow, U.S. Consul to Algiers and France, wrote in Advice to the Privileged Orders in the Several States of Europe, Resulting from the Necessity and Propriety of a General Revolution in the Principle of Government, 1792 (reprinted 1956, p. 46):
“The foundation of everything is … that the people will form an equal representative government … that the people will be universally armed …
A people that legislate for themselves ought to be in the habit of protecting themselves.”
Jeffrey R. Snyder, esq., wrote in “A Nation of Cowards” (The Public Interest, 1993, no. 113):
“Classical republican philosophy has long recognized the critical relationship between personal liberty and the possession of arms by a people ready and willing to use them.”
The Roman orator, Marcus Tullius Cicero, wrote (Cicero, Selected Political Speeches, trans. M. Grant, 1969, p. 222):
“There exists a law … inborn in our hearts … that if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right.”
Montesquieu wrote in The Spirit of the Laws (trans. T. Nugent, 1899, p. 64):
“It is unreasonable … to oblige a man not to attempt the defense of his own life.”
Machiavelli wrote in The Prince (trans. L. Ricci, 1952, p. 73, 81):
“It is not reasonable to suppose that one who is armed will obey willing one who is unarmed.”
Cesare Beccaria wrote in On Crimes and Punishment (trans. H. Paolucci, 1963, p. 87-88):
“False is the idea … that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it …
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature.
They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most scared laws of humanity, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity …
Such laws … serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
Thomas Paine wrote (Writings of Thomas Paine, Conway, ed., 1894, p. 56):
“The peaceable part of mankind will be continually overrun by the vile and abandoned while they neglect the means of self defense.
The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order.”
Aristotle wrote in Parts of Animals (trans. A. Peck, 1961, p. 373):
“Animals have just one method of defense and cannot change it for another …
For man, on the other hand, many means of defense are available, and he can change them at any time …
Take the hand: this is as good as a talon, or a claw, or a horn, or again, a spear, or a sword, or any other weapon or tool it can be all of these.”
Aristotle wrote in Politics (trans. T. Sinclair, 1962, p. 274):
“Those who possess and can wield arms are in a position to decide whether the constitution is to continue or not.”
Sir Thomas More wrote in Utopia (trans. R.M. Adams, 1975, p. 71):
“Men and women alike … assiduously exercise themselves in military training … to protect their own territory or to drive an invading enemy out of their friends’ land or, in pity for a people oppressed by tyranny, to deliver them by force of arms from the yoke and slavery of the tyrant.”
Roman historian Livy wrote (trans. B. Foster, 1919, p. 148):
“Formerly — in the reign of Rome’s 6th king, Servius Tullius, 578-535 B.C. — the right to bear arms had belonged solely to the patricians — ruling class.
Now plebeians — common citizens — were given a place in the army …
All the citizens capable of bearing arms were required to provide their own swords, spears, and other armor.”
Machiavelli wrote in On the Art of War (trans. E. Farnsworth, 1965, p. 30):
“Citizens, when legally armed … did the least mischief to any state …
Rome remained free for four hundred years and Sparta eight hundred, although their citizens were armed all that time, but many other states that have been disarmed have lost their liberty in less than forty years.”
Machiavelli wrote in Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livius (trans. L. Walker, 1965, p. 492):
“If any city be armed … as Rome was … all its citizens, alike in their private and official capacity … it will be found they will be of the same mind …
But, when they are not familiar with arms and merely trust to the whim of fortune … they will change with the changes of fortune.”
Adam Smith wrote in The Wealth of Nations (ed., Cannan, p. 309):
“Men of republican principles have been jealous of a standing army as dangerous of liberty …
The standing army of Caesar destroyed the Roman Republic.
The standing army of Cromwell turned the Long Parliament out of doors.”
Earl Warren wrote in The Bill of Rights and the Military (37N.Y.U. L. Rev. 181, 1962):
“Our War of the Revolution was, in good measure, fought as a protest against standing armies …
Thus we find in the Bill of Rights, Second Amendment … specifically authorizing a decentralized militia, guaranteeing the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”
Jeffrey R. Snyder, esq., wrote in “A Nation of Cowards” (The Public Interest, 1993, no. 113):
“Political theorists as dissimilar as Niccolo Machiavelli, Sir Thomas More, James Harrington, Algernon Sidney, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau all shared the view that the possession of arms is vital for resisting tyranny, and that to be disarmed by one’s government is tantamount to being enslaved by it.”
Anti-socialist John Basil Barnhill stated in a debate with Henry M. Tichenor, 1914 (National Rip Saw Publishing Co., St. Louis, MO):
“Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.”
The Texas Declaration of Independence, March 2, 1836, stated:
“The late changes made in the government by General Antonio Lopez Santa Anna, who having overturned the constitution of his country, now offers, as the cruel alternative, either abandon our homes acquired by so many privations, or submit to the most intolerable of all tyranny …
It has demanded us to deliver up our arms, which are essential to our defense – the rightful property of freemen — and formidable only to tyrannical governments.”
Theodore Brantner Wilson described in The Black Codes of the South (Univ,ersity of Alabama Press, 1965, p. 56) laws passed by Democrat Legislators:
“Mississippi quickly passed one law … outlawing possession of weapons by Negroes. The militia proceeded to disarm the Negroes in such a brutal fashion as to cause much criticism.
Alabama Negroes were disarmed by similar methods with like results.”
Frederick Douglass, the African-American advisor to President Lincoln, stated:
“A man’s rights rest in three boxes: The ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box.”
Mahatma Gandhi wrote in An Autobiography of the Story of My Experiments with the Truth (trans. M. Desai, 1927):
“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.”
Islamic sharia law forbids non-Muslims from possessing arms, swords or weapons of any kind.
Adolph Hitler acted similarly with his Edict of March 18, 1938:
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms;
history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.”
German Firearm Act of 1937 stated:
“Firearm licenses will not be granted to Jews.”
Richard Munday reported in “The Monopoly of Power,” presented to the American Society of Criminology, 1991, the Nazi order regarding arms, S.A. Ober Führer of Bad Tolz:
“S.A.–Storm Troopers, S.S.–para-military Gestapo, and Stahlhelm … Anyone who does not belong to one of the above-named organizations and who unjustifiably keeps his weapon … must be regarded as an enemy of the national government and will be brought to account without compunction and with the utmost severity.”
Democrat Vice-President Hubert Humphrey was quoted by David T. Hardy in The Second Amendment as a Restraint on State and Federal Firearms Restrictions (Kates, ed., Restricting Handguns: The Liberal Skeptics Speak Out, 1979):
“The right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.”
Jefferson wrote to George Washington, 1796 (The Jeffersonian Cyclopedia, John P. Foley, ed., New York & London, Funk & Wagnalls Co., 1900, No. 2138, iv, 143; Paul Leicester Ford, ed., vii. 84):
“One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.”
Similar to the midnight ride of Paul Revere, when Jefferson was Governor of Virginia, British Colonel Tarleton led his cavalry to Charlottesville to capture him.
Jefferson barely escaped, June 3, 1781, thanks to 27-year-old Jack Jouett, Junior, the “Paul Revere of the South,” who rode all night to warn to warn him.
Jefferson wrote in the Declaration on the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms, July 1775:
“We … most solemnly, before God and the world declare that … the arms we have been compelled to assume we will use with perseverance, exerting to their utmost energies all those powers which our Creator hath given us, to preserve that liberty which He committed to us in sacred deposit.”
–(Re3posted with permission from the American Minute https://americanminute.com/blogs/todays-american-minute