I know alot of raw vegans homeschool:

( wow this is like Nazi socialism, doing everything for the state



Threat to Homeschooling
Opinion Editorial by John Stossel - Apr 2, 2008
4 ratings from readers
A California appellate court just ruled parents have no constitutional right to homeschool their children, as the purpose of schooling is to train kids in "loyalty to the state." Does that give you pause? It should.




The cat is finally out of the bag. A California appellate court, ruling that parents have no constitutional right to homeschool their children, pinned its decision on this ominous quotation from a 47-year-old case, “A primary purpose of the educational system is to train schoolchildren in good citizenship,
patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare.”

There you have it; a primary purpose of government schools is to train schoolchildren in “loyalty to the state.” Somehow that protects “the public welfare” more than allowing parents to homeschool their children, even though homeschooled kids routinely outperform government-schooled kids academically.


In 2006, homeschooled students had an average ACT composite score of 22.4. The national average was 21.1.

Justice H. Walter Croskey said, “California courts have held that under provisions in the Education Code, parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children,” Justice Croskey said.

If that is the law in California, then Charles Dickens’s Mr. Bumble is right: “the law is a ass, a idiot.”

The California Constitution says, “A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, the Legislature shall encourage by all suitable means the promotion of intellectual, scientific, moral, and agricultural improvement.”

That doesn’t appear to rule out homeschooling, unless you read it as a grant of absolute power to politicians.

Admittedly, the education code is vague. It requires children to attend public school or a private school (where certified teachers are not required). But they can also be taught by state-credentialed tutors. Homeschooling is not directly addressed.


There’s disagreement over what that means. The court and the teachers’ union claim homeschooling is illegal unless the teaching parent has state credentials.

Homeschooling parents, many of whom have declared their homes private schools, say what they do is legal. Up till now that’s been fine with the California Department of Education. And California reportedly has 166,000 homeschoolers.

Nationwide, the National Center for Education Statistics says that in 2003 (the latest year for which it has a number) almost 1.1 million children were being homeschooled. The numbers keep increasing, so clearly homeschooling parents think their kids get something better at home than they would from public schools.

The Los Angeles Times isn’t sure where the state law stands. “If no such right [to homeschool] exists, as a court ruled, the Legislature should make it an option,” the newspaper’s editorial board said. The editorial wondered why parents who teach one or two children at home need credentials, while private-school teachers in classes full of kids don’t.

The danger in having the legislature clarify the law is that the legislature is controlled by politicians sympathetic to the teachers’ union, which despises homeschooling. “[H]ome-schoolers fear that any attempt to protect home-schooling would end up outlawing it,” writes Orange County Register columnist Steven Greenhut.

It reminds me of what New York Judge Gideon Tucker said in the Nineteenth Century, “No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”

This particular case is muddied by suspicions of child abuse, but as the Times said, the court improperly “used a single example of possible child abuse to throw the book at tens of thousands of home schoolers.”

I think the state court is looking at the state Constitution upside down. The court finds no constitutional right to homeschool one’s children.


But in a free country, people are free to do anything not expressly prohibited by law. If the Constitution is silent about homeschooling, then the right is reserved to the people. That’s how the Framers of the U.S. Constitution said things are supposed to work.

Last week, the appellate court surprised everyone by agreeing to rehear the case. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the judges “hinted at a re-evaluation of its entire Feb. 28 ruling by inviting written arguments from state and local education officials and teachers’ unions.”

On top of that, state Schools Superintendent Jack O’Connell says he thinks homeschooling is legal and favors choice in education.

That’s reasonable news. But why is education the business of government? It’s taken for granted that the state is every child’s ultimate parent, but there’s no justification for that in a free society. Parents may not be perfect — some are pretty bad — but a cold, faceless bureaucracy is no better.

Let’s hope the court gets it right in June.





John Stossel is co-anchor of ABC News’ “20/20” and the author of
Give Me a Break: How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats, and Scam
Artists and Became
the Scourge of the Liberal Media (January 2005) as well as Myth,
Lies, and Downright
Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel — Why Everything You Know Is Wrong
(May 2007),
which is now available in paperback.

Quote

Posted by: suvine (IP Logged)
Date: April 02, 2008 10:36AM

the purpose of schooling is to train kids in "loyalty to the state."

Maybe the state will want to change the school system so that it is like a military school and give the kids tests and then tell them what they are going to do with their lives for the good of the state. I think people need to be more concerned about preserving their freedoms and casting a well thought out vote is a great way to do that.

I'm an unschooler currently living in Pennsylvania. We originally planned on moving to Colorado, but we've since set our sights on Northern California. When I first heard about this case, I was a bit concerned. After thinking about it, I don't think it's really going to be much of an issue. There are far more than 166,000 homeschoolers in California, I'm sure, and if everyone needs to come together to create one big voice to protect our feedom, I'm sure it will happen.

Thanks for sharing this, Suvine.

Lots of love and true freedom to you and everyone else!

Wendi Dee
XOXOXO

You very clearly do not understand the meaning of this ruling. TThe law has been changed to state that parent who want to homeschool their children themselves (instead of using a tutor) must now become certified to teach. Thats all. I dont see how it could possibley be seen as a bad idea to make sure all children obtain a n adequate education. Teachers in school must be certified, teachers at home must be certified. Period. There is also a secondary reason for this law. There has been a serious increase in child neglect cases going on for years before being reported. This is because parent who are abusive and neglectful have realized that they can just say they are 'homeschooling' their children and then keep them locked up all day, with nobody to notice the signs of abuse in their children. School is not just for education, it provides a supportive place for children with troubled homes to seek help. About 2 months ago 4 children (ages 4-12 I think) were found murdered by their mother with an axe. She had been 'homeschooling' them for months. This is what prompted the reform. As much as we all want to be right all the time, we have to think about what is best, in this case, for children. Get the facts before you go on a tirade, failure to do so is called ignorance. Geez.

I would also like to make a request. I find your posts inappropriate. They are the reason I have stopped coming to this site. For example, this post belongs in 'other topics' as it is not health related. Please be more careful as I feel you are ruining the positive environment here.

selene

what do you mean by this post being inappropriate or ruining the positive environment

just for not being in the "other topics" forum ?

i'm not disagreeing or agreeing with you

i'm just wondering where you are coming from

u mentioned abuse occuring within homes

this can happen even if children are schooled outside of their homes

they can be abused when they return home

i do however see your point/concern that parents should have a certain level of
capability themselves in order to educate their children

aside from that however, i was curious as to what you meant by the post being offensive

did i miss something?

Well I guess the fact that I come to this forum for health advice and ideas, not political rants would be the first thing that makes me uncomfortable. This is not the place for that.

But more than that, all I can say is that I am responding to a negative vibe (for lack of a better word). For example, relating this issue to nazis is immature and extreme.

As far as my reasons for supporting this new law (which, to say again, is that homeschoolers must be CERTIFIED, not that oarents cant teach their kids) the abuse thing is very important. Yes, children are often abused at home and still go to school, but most teachers are trained in noticing the signs of abuse (anything from bruises to antisocial behivior or distrust of adults). This is just one more thing we can do to protect or children. On a personal note, I was subject of abuse as a child. While still in school, the abuse never went to far. Then in 5th grade, my parents began to homeschool me. I nearly died. I dont need to go into details but needless to say, there are many cases of abuse increasing or being hidden by homeschool. This is not an isolated incedent.

Anyways, this post just doesnt belong in this forum, Suvine, as much as you want it to be, this forum is not your personal soapbox. Stop treating it that way. It alienates people who come here to learn more about/share the positivity of the raw food lifestyle.

Oh good, it was moved, thats all I really needed, thanks!

hi selenes,

i can understand your point of view a lot more clearly now
thanks for taking the time to elucidate your point
it is appreciated

i read the book " The Boy Called It" ( autobiographical story) and it did show how the school was successfully able to intervene in the worst case of child abuse and he was then able to be transferred to foster care ( which he seems to rate as a far better environment than his original one)

had the school not intervened, it is extremely doubtful that he would have survived

your perspective should be respected

however, there are also probably cases where the parents are kind, loving, extremely capable and intelligent and homeschooling their children is viewed as the best thing to do ( i read pakd4fun's perspectives in homeschooling her kids and they seem to be doing pretty well)

i still agree about the fact that parents ought to have a certain level of capability

like most things, a person's point of view really boils down to their own personal experiences which are always valid

i went to public school and had a pretty good time
but i can also see how homeschooling can serve a child if the parents are able to create a nurturing environment that encourages creative thinking

i'm sorry that happened to you selene

wishing you bountiful healing

I don't see how this law will prevent anyone who is an abuser from just slipping off the radar and keeping their children home anyway. I know homeschoolers who don't register with the state. If they are abusing their children, how is a little law like that going to stop them? It will be just as easy for abusers to become certified as anyone else. The point is the Government is dictating our freedom in how we educate our children. I have gotten out of the mind set that eighteen years of a classroom drilled into me. We don't all need to learn the same things the same way. All children really need to learn is access to information. The thirst for knowledge is innate and is never ending. Our education begins at birth at ends when, ??death?? Maybe never. My daughter is in her seventh year of violin and her fourth year of piano. I don't know a thing about music. My other daughter is in chess club and is now teaching me how to play. Certifying me as a teacher won't change any of that. Child abuse is a terrible thing but it has nothing to do with educating children at home. If we were to make a law that all children under the age of fifteen have to go live in institutions because some families have killed their children, would that be extreme? Well. I find any infringement on my God given right to educate my children extreme. Your abusive childhood has absolutely nothing to do with me or my children. Also all teachers in schools are not required to be certified, not that that matters to me. I don't want them coming near my children, certified or not. Some teachers are the most abusive people I have ever been around. Some seem to be attracted to teaching by the control they can have over children. I don't want them any where near my children. These are my decisions, not yours, not a judges.

I appreciate you posting this editorial. I enjoyed reading it.

sure- train all parents to school their children (through government funds, since the system will be saving 12 years of school fees) or even better- all graduates of the school system automatically qualify as 'trained' since they've been through it and already passed therefore qualifying them.

as a college graduate, and a grad school drop-out, i would desire that all my children's teachers be at least as qualified as me- a 32 or above on the ACT, standard testing scores of 98% or above. i know my education has been far beyond my father's teaching certificate (which i wrote his papers for as a sophmore in high school). college is the new high school- i've learned more from my two years as a homeschooler and then my years outside of school (where i've found a love of history and a forced geography lesson that many years of schooled failed to give me).

i'm not the norm. but i certainly don't trust the government organized systems to do better than the average person! from what i can tell, they appeal to the lowest common denominator and the lowest common good. they can't aspire higher b/c they would eliminate many.

allow us to feed ourselves and our children what we think is best for their health (raw veganism would be outlawed if they could find the loophole), and allow us to teach them to think instead of just repeat lessons or facts.

peace-