Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Nobel Peace Prize Winner

Her mission must be to Educate for Freedom

"Even if there was a gun in my hand and he stood in front of me, I would not shoot him."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rNhZu3ttIU

Dear brother and sisters do remember one thing, Malalal Day is not my day.  Today is the day of every woman, evey boy and every girl who have raised their voice for their rights.  There are hundreds of human rights activists and social workers who are not only seeking for their rights but are struggling for their goals.

Thousands of people have been killed by terrorists and millions injured and I am just one.
So here I stand, one girl among many, I speak not for myself, but for those without voice can be heard.  Those who have fought for their rights, their right to live in peace their right to be treated with dignity their rights to equality
Their right to be educated.

9 Oct 2012, the Taliban shot me on the left side of my forehead, they shot my friends too.  The bullet that would silence us failed and out of that silence came thousands of voices.

Nothing changed in my life except this, weakness, fear, and hopelessness died.

Strength and Courage was born.

http://www.malala-yousafzai.com/

 Powerful speech http://www.businessinsider.com/malala-yousafzai-left-jon-stewart-speechless-2013-10

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

October 10th KEY AWARDS


Our Key Award Winners for this week are:
Sister Harper !!!  
These colonists have completed the requirements for the American Heritage Award and will be receiving their key this week during the Key Moment.




Previous Award Winners:

Dallin Harper   and Sage Frye,  Micah and Mariah Sudweeks,  Sister Sudweeks and Sister Cummings,  Madeline Brown and Jayson Cummings

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Socialist Economics Question


Apprentice Scholar Challenge

Why did our founding Fathers create the type of government in which free enterprise and personal accomplishment are above socialist policy?  Could it be that their knowledge of history proved socialism doesn't work?  

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. 

That class had insisted that  socialism works.  If we all share wealth, no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on this plan."


All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all). 


After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. 


As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. 


When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. 


As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. 


To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

  1. Government cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. 
  2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
  3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that which the government does not first take from somebody else.
  4. Government cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
  5. When half of the people do not work and the other half takes care of them, then the other half decide that it does no good to work.

Our founding fathers knew that this flawed philosophy would be the end of nations.

Monday, October 7, 2013

John Adams: Reluctant Patriot of the Revolution

Our current reading selection that is due complete for discussion on October 17th.

This short quiz may help students progress through the book and will aid in the discussion next week.

     1.   How many siblings did John Adams have? P. 10
2.   What did John Adams father do for a living? P.  8
3.   What religion was John Adams?  P 9
4.   John was the eldest of the Adams children so what was he expected to do?  P. 11
5.   Which language became John Adam’s favorite as a youth?  P 15
6.   What did this phrase mean that so charmed him that he chanted it aloud?   Veni Vidi Vici? P15
7.   What school did John join when he was almost 16?  P. 16     To become what? P. 18
8.   The food was so bad that the boys in his room decided to do what?  P 20
9.   Did John lie about what the boys had done?  P 21
10. What did John become directly after college?  P 23
11. Since he hated that, what did he study for next?  P 25
12. His father dies, he practiced law, mostly unsuccessfully and met who to marry?  P 53
13. What was the stamp act?  Pg 56
      14.  Who was the principal opponent of the stamp act?  The Lawyer?  
15. With which president did  John Adams serve as Vice-President? P 126
16. John Adams because which number President of the United States?   P. 131
17. John Adams lost his election for a second term.  Who did he lose to? 
18. How many years did John Adams live after he left congress?  P. 143
19. Which of John Adams sons became President of the United States?  P 140
20. What were his last words.  P. 140

CANDY CHALLENGE 10-13 Midnight Ride of Paul Revere

READ PAUL REVERE'S RIDE,

or

Watch both of these on the internet and earn the candy challenge!

School House Rock link   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6ikO6LMxF4


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4hUMQG3MI8



Come to class with a question.  Why was it called the "Shot Heard Around The World?"

Friday, October 4, 2013

Apprentice Scholar Challenge

“Why complicate “good moral people” with the belief of God,”  is an ongoing conversation from last week.    
 Jessica L., by the way, insightful paper!  YOU ROCK!  

 
Sister Darcey Question of the Week?

“Are ‘Morals’ dependent on the existence of God?”

based on the essay, A Response to Richard Dawkins"  by Dennis Prager

Without God, “good” and “evil” cannot be objective realities, because to do so assigns personality, and indicates some sort of opposing force (deific).   The two words alone become opinions—substitutes for “I like it” and “I don’t like it.” 


Morality in its godless form derives its reason from the masses -- so society dictates.

Murder:           God dictates Thou shalt not.

Atheist response:  Reason dictates thou should not.

Flaws inthis  reason are proved through historical perspective: 

1.       The pre-Christian Germanic tribes of Europe reasoned that killing innocent people was acceptable and normal –survival of the fittest.
2.       South African apartheid acceptable in that society.
3.       Jews in Nazi Germany
4.       Slavery throughout history

When self-interest and reason collide, reason usually loses. Hence, the word “rationalize” — using reason to argue for what is wrong.   As a whole, society tends to respond en mass in its own best interests—egocentrically.


Prager states, “Perhaps the most powerful proof of the moral decay that follows the death of God is [our universities.]

Princeton University awarded its first tenured professorship in bioethics to Peter Singer, an atheist who has argued, among other things, that that “the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee” and that bestiality is not immoral.

Empirical Evidences from his article:  

When the Jewish authors of  the following study on altruism, were asked who they would go to for safety, they state they would pick Christians.

Dennis Prager interviewed Pearl and Sam Oliner, two professors of sociology at Humboldt State University in California and the authors of one of the most highly regarded works on altruism, The Altruistic Personality, about  the Oliners’ lifetime of study of non-Jewish rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust.  The Oliners, it should be noted, are secular, not religious, Jews; they had no religious agenda.  I asked Samuel Oliner, “Knowing all you now know about who rescued Jews during the Holocaust, if you had to return as a Jew to Poland and you could knock on the door of only one person for rescue, would you knock on the door of a Polish lawyer, a Polish doctor, a Polish artist, or a Polish priest?”

Without hesitation, he said, “a Polish priest.” And his wife immediately added, “I would prefer a Polish nun.”


I would agree with the final comment by the author in the article stating that atheistic supporters have a right to their atheism, but not to intellectual dishonesty about it. 

CURRENT EVENTS: Senator Derides a National Park Employee


CURRENT EVENTS!


Was the Senator right or wrong?  What is the debate?  What is your response?  What is your parents response?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/03/congressman-park-ranger-memorial_n_4037524.html