Education: A Privilege, a Right, or a Requirement

31 03 2008

Filed under: Education, Homeschooling, Courts, Liberalism, Breathingist

Home-schooling in California is not dead yet. The 2nd District Court of Appeals in Los Angeles agreed to hear an appeal to a February 28th decision that found parents lacking teaching credentials cannot legally educate their children at home. The Court accepted the request for an appeal from the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), after a nationwide outcry in fear of the law sweeping through the rest of the country.

A California court announced Tuesday it will reconsider what Dr. James Dobson called an “egregious decision” to criminalize home schooling in the state.
“Parents have a fundamental right to make educational choices for their children,” ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb said. “Because this ruling impacts all Californians, we believe the case deserves a second look. We look forward to presenting this case for rehearing.”

Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the court’s decision to rehear the case is a welcomed sign.

“Handing down broad opinions with widespread impact without hearing from the very people and organizations affected is a recipe for disaster, which is exactly what happened here,” he said. “The court’s decision, which has now been vacated, trampled on fundamental parental rights that have been recognized in numerous Supreme Court decisions.

At what point did a public education become a right, much less mandatory? The only Constitutional rights Americans are provided are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Where we have clouded the mixture by adding education to these rights is the assumption that without a government education, there won’t be a pursuit of happiness. Educating our children should be a privilege. This is not elitist to say – it’s constitutional.

Ilana Mercer explains why education is not a right:

The right to go about one’s business unmolested and unharmed – and to take the actions necessary to sustain life without harming or encroaching on others – is man’s only natural right. This right is what government must legitimately protect. By extension, any right that depends for its existence on the labor of another is not a right. To the extent government manufactures and reinforces these non-rights, it is an entity of thieves and feudal lords.
Where the legislator has deployed the force of the law to transform so many human needs into inalienable rights, he can then step in and declare the thwarting of these bogus rights an actionable violation of “human rights.”

But just because some service or commodity has, by government fiat, been declared a right, doesn’t mean that it will now fall abundantly like manna from the heavens. The costs of the commodity or service don’t magically dissipate. Someone must work to pay for and supply subsidized housing, health care or education. So long as this is the case, these are never rights, but politically counterfeited rights.

California’s liberal, breathingist court system isn’t trying to help children or prevent “human rights” from being trampled. They are acting in the best interest of the National Education Association (NEA). The NEA, as all liberal organizations do, stands opposed to any resemblance of competition to its monopoly on filling young minds with its humanist propaganda.

What has the NEA so concerned with homeschooling that they need to wipe it off the table completely? How about a peer-reviewed study published by the EPAA, performed in 1999, which was the first of its kind to examine data comparing homeschool students to their public school counterparts? The results were shocking:

homeschool grades

A composite score of 250 was achieved by homeschool students in 6th grade. But it took public school students until nearly 9th grade to reach the same score. The competition is making the NEA look extremely bad and they don’t like it.

In typical liberal fashion, they turned to the courts to eradicate their competition and return their control to education. And what initially appeared to be a victory for them is now being given a second look. And this time, it should be overturned. Americans have a right to provide a superior education than the underperforming NEA’s product.




2 responses

15 07 2008
Controversial California Home-School Case Dismissed « Truth and Reason

[…] California Home-School Case Dismissed 15 07 2008 The unconstitutional February 28 ruling by a California Appeals Court outlawing ALL home-schooling in the state of California has been […]

16 07 2008
Mr. Incredible

I’ve been under the impression, left by Lefties, that what happens in the home, behind closed doors, is none of anybody’s bidness. Now, all of a sudden, this is their concern.

“Well,” they’d say, “the child doesn’t have a say, and, thus, can’t give his consent!”

However, in law, the parent speaks for the child and his best interests, and, if the parent thinks that home-schooling is the way to go, that’s the way it is.

Now, I also wanna make sure that the child is getting the stuff he’s s’posed to be getting, and that’s why the State test the child for comptetence.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: