NC judge orders homeschooled kids to public school

This was posted in the homeschool forum:


http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=58188

 

Even though I am a big public school supporter, this is wrong!

 

The "problem" being what? That the teaching is "Christian based", or that the kids were getting a better education than they will ever get in a public school?

 

Just from my own brief exposure (neither possible pun intended) to this, it appears to be a prima facie example of the old adage that "Bad cases make for bad rulings!" here.

This is a ruling in part of a divorce case, not a ruling about the merits of any schooling, where, IMO, the judge has either allowed his own (or that of the father of Mrs. Venessa Mills) distaste for a particular church, namely "the Solid Doctrine Church", whatever that is exactly, to have some influence on the ruling.

Although one can never be certain, I suspect that, barring some unforeseen additional information that we are lacking here, the judge, in this case, might wanna' be sure to be in possession of a good and serviceable sling, especially if Mrs. Mills is the de jure, as well as the apparent de facto, custodial parent. He will eventually likely need something with which to haul around his re@r end, after it is handed to him, "on appeal" of the case, which I suspect may well be forthcoming.

In the meantime however, this ruling will no doubt be lauded by those who hate Christian education, home-schooling, 'fundamentalistic' churches, conservatives in general, etc..

And we can thus see a scenario arising, in which this becomes an ongoing case where "Everybody loses!" to fulfill another old adage.

The list of "losers" no longer stops with the father who had the admitted affair.

Now we may be able to add to it, the kids, the mother, the judge, and countless more, who initially had absolutely no connection to the original ruling, simply because of this one bad case.

Ed

 

This is not a homeschool case it is a divorce case.

The issue is not the quality of the children's education but if the Father has any rights left in the education of his children.

I agree with the Judge on this one, and we homeschool.

If the parents agreed on their children's education it would not be an issue. It is the Father who wants to put his kids in public school.

It is not about religion but religion is the root of the problem because it is a difference in religion that has come between the parents. A good case of why we should not be unequally yoked.

 

That may be true, but this could set a precident that would hinder other homeschoolers.

 

This is true. I have a neighbor who thinks homeschooling is wrong. So they called Children and Youth on my wife and I saying our kids weren't properly educated. The thing is we have to submit to our school district their cirriculum and completed work. Our kids still have to take the standardize tests. And once the Social worker reivewed their work assignements and that our kids were ahead for their grade they said that the person reporting it was wrong but they don't say it sorry for showing up but what they do is send a letter saying the claim was unfounded and that I'm supposed to ensure their education is appropiate. I pay local taxes and spend thousands on purchasing required books and supplies for their cirriculum. It's just bullying tactics to keep families from instilling God centered values in our children. This can be used against homeschoolers. California's attempt almost got away with it.

 

I am glad that your issue was worked out Thinkingstuff, but that was a complete stranger, not a parent.

What if you disagreed with the way your spouse wanted to educate your children?

That is the issue here, when the parents disagree about the education plan, then what.

IMHO, and I know I am biased because I am a man, but IMHO, too many times the parental rights of the father are trampled in favor of those of the mother. A father can be forced to pay child support, but can be denied visitation. Other than giving them his money does the father have any say so in his children's upbringing. The article does not even say what the custody status is. If it is joint or shared custody does the Father get any say so?

I think the Judge is right and I hope this sets a precedent that when the parents are in disagreement and the choice is forced to the court that the court conforms to what we consider the norm of our society.

I know we all feel for the woman because she is, according to the article, a Christian trying to educate her children. But what if she were Muslim or Hindu, or pagan. Would you still support her choice to educate her children in complete exclusion of the father's wishes? No one is denying the mother's right to teach her religion to her children, they are just requiring a "more rounded" education than the Mother's religion alone.

 

You make a good point and with the way men in our society are being socially discriminated against I understand you point more. Of course I wouldn't agree with a Hindu or Muslim education which often are worse than our public school.

 

Who are you to judge a Hindu education if you will not permit a Hindu to judge your home schooled kids?

 

Who are we to judge a Hindu education? I don't know about you, but I'm a child of the King! According to Him, the Hindu is going to hell. That's proof enough for me that a Hindu education is no good.

 

Its not a matter of individual judgment, but of our governments. We cannot as a nation judge one religion superior to another, for we cannot count on Christianity being the religion of the majority for perpetuity. Individually, of course we can judge, and we can choose how our children are educated. But this was a case where the parents disagreed and forced the secular court system to make that decision for them.

In the United States we are supposed to have freedom of religion. In many nations that contributed to our founding this was not the case. I have read the History of Ireland and how the Papal laws of the 18th century made it illegal to teach Catholic children to read. At the same time in France it was illegal to educate protestant Huguenot children. Our founding documents sought to eliminate the possibility of either happening in our nation.

Lets flip the case around. Lets say the girls were in the custody of the Father. And instead of a Christian Fundamentalist, lets say the Father is a Muslim Fundamentalist, a Muslim Fundamentalist who believes it is a sin for girls to learn to read, a belief rather common in Afghanistan and Pakistan right now. And lets say the divorced mother sued in court to ensure that her daughters received some education. In the eyes of a religion neutral court there should be no difference between these cases and both should result in the same judgment, send the kids to school.

 

I can judge what ever I want. I've traveled the world and seen these things for myself. However, I wouldn't tell a hindu not to train their children the way they want but I won't premit my children to be trained in such a way. I would not force muslims not to train their kids but I would not train my children that way. Doesn 't mean I can't judge them. I do. Just like I judge you and every one I come in contact with. I make judgements all the time. What I do not do is call C&Y on hindu's or Muslims because I don't agree with their education. I don't have a problem with a neighbor disagreeing with me about my children but I will not use government to do my "dirty work" for me. I'm not suggesting that these people have the government go after them. They should just like myself be able to have their children meet the secular standard of education at the least. But as for judging I do it all the time and so do you. Its what we do. The bible just says that we should judge people in the same manner as we want ourselves judged not remove judgement all together.

 

I'm with North Carolina Tentmaker on this one. This is a divorce case, not a homeschooling case.

If the mother were to continue homeschooling, how would she work? Now we'd like to say that since dad had an affair he should have to continue supporting her and the children and she shouldn't have to go back to work, but reality is, dad will only be responsible for a certain amount of support. Mom will have to make up the difference. Can she homeschool and work too? Evidently the judge thought not.

Then there is the question of how much input the father should have into the lives of the children. Whether or not we approve of his actions, he still has rights beyond the right to pay alimony and child support.

I'm not seeing this as an attack on homeschooling as much as I'm seeing it as a warning of what might happen to the children in the event of a divorce.

 

Oh well, in that case, since fathers have no rights once they're divorced, why give him any say in how his children are educated? In a divorce, the woman gets the gold mine, and the man gets the shaft. The only one who wins in a divorce is the woman. No one cares about the man or the children. "Friend of the Court" should change its name to "Friend of the ex-wife."

 

Doesn't have anything to do with "Christ being the only way." Has to do with someone potentially needing a cancer specialist. Would anyone out there first look in the "Christian Yellow Pages?" Would anyone out there reject the best available physician because he was a Hindu?

Anyone one else out there ever get shafted by a person advertising as a "Christian" professional person?

 

Saying a fresh prayer for you Jon-Marc. Your pain is evident in your post and I am sorry you have had to go through that. At least in this case it appears that the Father is getting some say so. Divorce hurts everyone involved, although some sharper than others.

 

What does this have to do with the discussion? I don't think anyone is suggesting that other faiths don't have a right to be educated.