Seriously?

 

yes seriously you are making the accusation that living with out utilities is equivalent to being unintelligent. I personally know several people that live without any utilities and built their own homes themselves (albeit they've done a much better job then the people in this story). They are some of the most intelligent people I know, the ability to create their own sustainable energy or to live without, to dispose of their own waste, to harvest their own food and water, it's something I admire and strive towards.

---

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/free-ran...ky-family/


Some key points:

 

Some of the children also lack birth certificates and Social Security numbers, which some homeschooling advocates define as identification abuse.

There is no indication the couple complied with Kentucky’s minimum standards for educating children at home.

Social media posts indicate that other homeschooling parents in the area were uncomfortable with the couple, claiming the Nauglers hid behind the unschooling and off-the-grid movements to cover their lackadaisical parenting.

“I home school my children, (and) my children are taught the things they need to know to be successful,” the commenter said. “What the Naugler’s (sic) do is simply call it home schooling when in fact they are too lazy to actually home school them.”

 

All valid points but is it illegal to not accept a social security number or birth certificate?

 

I was home-schooled for a few years and we have plans to home-school our kids in the future, obviously I don't agree with how they are doing it but have the broken any laws? From what I read Kentucky's homeschooling laws are basically tell us you're homeschooling, keep records of attendance and make sure they can read and write.

---

yes seriously you are making the accusation that living with out utilities is equivalent to being unintelligent. I personally know several people that live without any utilities and built their own homes themselves (albeit they've done a much better job then the people in this story). They are some of the most intelligent people I know, the ability to create their own sustainable energy or to live without, to dispose of their own waste, to harvest their own food and water, it's something I admire and strive towards.

 

Living off the grid is one thing, making a choice to live in a shack is another. Especially when you make that choice for children.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Living off the grid is one thing, making a choice to live in a shack is another. Especially when you make that choice for children.

 

They have said it is their goal to build a more permanent structure on the 27 acres but that doesn't happen over night it takes time. It seems your hesitation is because children are involved correct?

 

So is the argument that living conditions are different for people with and without children?

---

They have said it is their goal to build a more permanent structure on the 27 acres but that doesn't happen over night it takes time. It seems your hesitation is because children are involved correct?

 

So is the argument that living conditions are different for people with and without children?

 

Yes. Because the choices for children are much more limited.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Yes. Because the choices for children are much more limited.

Which is why education is so important. It allows them to make the decision they feel best for them when it comes time.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Yes. Because the choices for children are much more limited.

 

fair point, but isn't that a short step from only those who can afford children should have children? Once you've set the precedent the poor shouldn't have children because they can't afford them where does it go from there?

 

I wouldn't put my kids in that situation they have chosen, heck my wife would murder me before that ever happened. But the question I've asked and seems you have answered is at what point is the condition of living considered abuse.

---

fair point, but isn't that a short step from only those who can afford children should have children? Once you've set the precedent the poor shouldn't have children because they can't afford them where does it go from there?

 

I wouldn't put my kids in that situation they have chosen, heck my wife would murder me before that ever happened. But the question I've asked and seems you have answered is at what point is the condition of living considered abuse.

 

Removing children from a home because of poor living conditions is not unprecedented.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

indeed they are what I would call extreme and even poverty stricken (perhaps by choice) but is being poor and refusing state assistance illegal or grounds for children to be removed?

 

here's pictures of the home

 


 

a link to their facebook with many more pictures

 
<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.facebook.com/MyBlessedLittleHomestead'>https://www.facebook.com/MyBlessedLittleHomestead</a>

Can we all agree that what they are living in is in no shape or form a "cabin"??? I've seen better chicken coops! Hell, Eric...your chickens live better than that!!! It gets cold in Kentucky!!

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Removing children from a home because of poor living conditions is not unprecedented.

 

good point, so we're saying they're being removed because of living conditions not because of homeschooling then?

 

Can we all agree that what they are living in is in no shape or form a "cabin"??? I've seen better chicken coops! Hell, Eric...your chickens live better than that!!! It gets cold in Kentucky!!

 

haha very good point I agree that's not a cabin. I'm not even saying they "shouldn't" be removed for living in that condition. I'm just wondering what's the standard 4 walls and roof? Or is it the lack of utilities?

---

good point, so we're saying they're being removed because of living conditions not because of homeschooling then?

 

 

From what I read, they are being removed on that premise while the matter is being investigated further. It may be a matter of the judge being concerned and using a tactic available to get the children in a safe place while they look into it.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Intelligence. A subjective word. Get a city bred person with a Harvard education and a Kentucky mountain man with little " education"

Put either one in the others environment and you'd probably see failure from both.


As far as the kids go, it's high time momma put a cork in it.

---

Blakes Life Matters

So according to this article https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/off-the-...63547.html

 

"The court’s decision came several days after authorities removed the children from their home, following an anonymous police complaint about the family’s living conditions — which allegedly include residing under a crude tarp construction, having no heat or running water, and having no septic system (which the Nauglers dispute)"

 

I'm still not sure how I feel about this.

---

Sure, for some people that is the lifestyle they desire, why does that make them unintelligent?

10 kids? Is that responsible? If that is the lifestyle they want to live should they have that many kids?

---

10 kids? Is that responsible? If that is the lifestyle they want to live should they have that many kids?

 

Somebody's gotta work the fields.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

So according to this article https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/off-the-...63547.html

 

"The court’s decision came several days after authorities removed the children from their home, following an anonymous police complaint about the family’s living conditions — which allegedly include residing under a crude tarp construction, having no heat or running water, and having no septic system (which the Nauglers dispute)"

 

I'm still not sure how I feel about this.

How you feel about what? This family keep their 10 kids in those conditiions or them temporarily losing them?

---

;

;

10 kids? Is that responsible? If that is the lifestyle they want to live should they have that many kids?

 

Why is a big family irresponsible? They've said the conditions they are in is temporary while they build a more permanent structure. I know it's outside the norm but if there's no abuse and the children are not in physical danger I tend to side with the parents, let them live as they see fit.

 

secondly when did responsibly become a condition of keeping your children, hell we have a whole lot of kids to grab up if we're only letting responsible people be parents.

---

How you feel about what? This family keep their 10 kids in those conditiions or them temporarily losing them?

 

Both, yes those conditions are extreme but for generations people lived safely without modern heat they have a wood stove for cooking and heat during the winters. Are we saying that without central heat/air you can't have kids now?

---

Are we saying that without central heat/air you can't have kids now?

 

Literally nobody has said that

---

;

;

Literally nobody has said that

 

I'm thinking out loud the problems with the living conditions tell me if I'm missing one.

 

1. Not an inclosed structure (only has 3 walls)

2. No running water

3. No climate control

 

Plenty of people live without running water so that's not a reason to take the children so it's either the structure or the lack of climate control?

---