A QUIET THREAT TO HOMESCHOOLING
|
Autor: Lee Duigon
|
Fuente: The Chalcedon Foundation
|
Will
homeschooling
Christian
parents
be
compelled
to
teach
their
children
to
embrace
“safe
sex,”
abortion
on
demand,
and
moral
relativism?
It
sounds
absurd,
but
it
could
happen
tomorrow,
next
month,
or
anytime.
The
proposal
is
on
the
table,
waiting
for
a
judge
to
pick
it
up.
Children
have
a
constitutional
right
to
learn
about
beliefs
and
ways
of
life
other
than
those
of
their
parents,
and
the
state
has
a
duty
to
secure
that
right
for
them.
So
argued
Rob
Reich,
political
science
and
education
professor
at
Stanford
University,
at
the
2001
convention
of
the
American
Political
Science
Association,
reading
from
a
paper
entitled,
“Testing
the
Boundaries
of
Parental
Authority
over
Education,
the
Case
of
Home
Schooling.”
He
included
the
paper
as
a
chapter
in
his
2002
book,
Bridging
Multiculturalism
and
Liberalism
in
Education.
As
dry
and
academic
as
that
seems,
Reich’s
new
children’s
“right”
has
attracted
the
notice
of
America’s
education
elite.
“Reich’s
material
is
being
read
and
referenced,”
reported
Home
Education
Magazine
News
&
Commentary
recently.
“He
has
the
ear
of
the
media.”
In
his
writings,
Reich
proposes
that
homeschooling
should
be
monitored
by
the
state
to
ensure
that
parents
teach
their
children
beliefs
and
lifestyles
that
they
may
oppose
—
that
parents
may
even
believe
to
be
evil.
One
lawsuit
brought
to
the
right
court
—
the
9th
Circuit
Court
of
Appeals
in
San
Francisco,
for
instance,
(famous
for
declaring
the
Pledge
of
Allegiance
unconstitutional)
—
could
allow
a
judge
to
rule
that
Professor
Reich
is
right,
that
children
do
have
a
right
to
learn
beliefs
and
behaviors
opposed
to
those
of
their
parents.
And
if
the
parents
refuse
to
teach
them
such,
then
the
court
may
order
them
to
secure
their
children’s
“rights”
by
sending
them
to
public
school.
“We
see
that
danger,”
says
Thomas
Washburne,
J.D.,
of
the
Home
School
Legal
Defense
Fund.
“You
might
see
it
come
up
in
a
case
where
homeschooling
parents
demonstrably
failed
to
educate
a
child.
Some
advocacy
group
might
file
a
suit
and
try
to
mount
a
case
for
the
child.
They
might
claim
the
child
has
this
right
Reich
has
identified,
and
the
judge
might
agree.”
In
a
recent
Amazon.com
reader
review
of
Reich’s
book,
the
reviewer
declared,
“The
leading
goal
of
education
is
to
develop
autonomy
in
children.”
The
statement
was
echoed
in
Hem
News
&
Commentary:
“The
state
has
a
role
of
promoting
the
independent
interest
of
children,
including
the
right
to
live
a
life
other
than
that
their
parents
lead.”
These
astounding
statements
—
are
we
to
believe
that
until
today’s
hip
educators
came
along,
children
were
doomed
to
be
carbon
copies
of
their
parents?
—
show
that
Reich’s
ideas
have
fallen
upon
fertile
ground.
Reich
asserts,
“Children
are
owed
as
a
matter
of
justice
the
capacity
to
lead
lives—adopt
values
and
beliefs,
pursue
an
occupation,
endorse
new
[sic]
traditions—that
are
different
from
those
of
their
parents.
Because
the
child
cannot
…
ensure
the
acquisition
of
such
capacities
and
the
parents
may
be
opposed
…
the
state
must
ensure
it
for
them”
(emphasis
added).
“It
is
at
this
point
that
we
can
begin
to
see
the
implications,
indeed
danger,
of
Reich’s
ideas
for
home
education,”
Washburne
says.
Reich
has
also
written,
“Neither
parents
nor
the
state
can
justly
attempt
to
imprint
indelibly
upon
a
child
a
set
of
values
and
beliefs.”
Are
you
listening,
Christian
parents?
Consider
Biblical
injunctions,
such
as:
“And
ye
shall
teach
them
(God’s
words)
[to]
your
children
…
(Dt.
11:19),
or
“Train
up
a
child
in
the
way
he
should
go
…”(Pr.
22:6).
To
obey
these
injunctions,
in
Reich’s
view,
would
be
unjust.
Yet
he
argues
that
state
interference
in
home
education
may
be
necessary
to
secure
the
children’s
religious
freedom:
“[T]he
state
cannot
relinquish
its
regulatory
role
in
education
in
cases
where
parents
invoke
their
religious
beliefs
as
a
bulwark
against
secular
authority”
(emphasis
added).
Translation:
homeschooling
is
okay,
as
long
as
you
don’t
teach
your
children
to
be
Christians.
“What
Reich
is
doing,”
Washburne
says,
“is
setting
an
academic
framework
by
which
an
activist
judge
might
rule
in
favor
of
heavy
restrictions
on
home
education.”
What
is
the
purpose
of
Reich’s
proposals?
Says
Washburne,
“The
education
elite
sees
homeschoolers
as
traditional
moralists,
raising
their
children
to
be
traditional
moralists.
They
teach
their
children
truth
—
truth
that
the
elite
doesn’t
believe
in,
doesn’t
recognize.
It
drives
them
crazy
that
they
can’t
get
at
these
homeschooled
children.”
For
many
parents,
the
whole
point
of
homeschooling
is
to
get
their
children
out
of
the
public
schools
and
away
from
corrupt
ideas
and
values.
Now
Reich
proposes
that
these
corrupt
ideas
be
brought
into
the
home
by
the
parents
themselves
—
or
else.
“It’s
been
quiet
so
far
this
year,”
Washburne
says,
“but
Reich’s
ideas
are
out
there.
We’re
waiting
to
see
if
anyone
tries
to
implement
them.”
Perhaps
Christian
parents
ought
to
start
planning
what
they
will
do
if
an
activist
judge
rules
that
their
children
have
a
“right”
to
be
taught
Practical
Paganism
101.
From
the
view
of
this
writer,
it’s
only
a
matter
of
time
before
such
an
answer
will
be
needed.
|
