Americans Warned: Homeschoolers Stripped of Rights
Recently, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said that homeschooling is not a parent's right. It is a statement some are saying should frighten American parents.
Nations like Germany and Sweden show that when governments take away homeschooling rights, it's a slippery slope to no parental rights.
The Romeike family came to the United States from Germany five years ago hoping to find refuge. They wanted to homeschool their children in freedom and a federal judge granted them asylum.
But now the Obama administration has been trying to deport them, arguing that homeschooling is not a right. The case is currently before a federal appeals court....
Gymnast wrote: ... Children need to be rescued from cultic Mormon compounds in Utah just as much as they need to rescued from Muslim Madrassas in Kandahar and Dearborn. Unless your hate them, in which case leave them to be abused. ...
What they need to be rescued by is more and better preaching. What they do not need to be rescued by is the apparatus of the state (save for actual crimes being committed). I defend the civil right of Muslims to have their Madrassas and Mormons to have their "compounds" for I desire the civil right for Christians to have their schools. Research how offended the state gets by Christian schools that do not go under the headship of the state. See what happened to the Lester Roloff homes in Texas, read The Trail of Blood Revisited by Pastor Greg Dixon Sr. Pharaoh doesn't like Christian schools under the headship of Jesus Christ.
John Beechy wrote: Product. Merchandise. That is most certainly correct. State schoolers, private schoolers, homeschoolers - nearly all registered merchandise with the beast indoctrinated to serve, worship, and give allegiance to the State god and to be good little State Supremacists.
Product. Merchandise. That is most certainly correct. State schoolers, private schoolers, homeschoolers - nearly all registered merchandise with the beast indoctrinated to serve, worship, and give allegiance to the State god and to be good little State Supremacists.
Christopher000 wrote: Real Time from USA writes: Sorry! I'm a product of the publik skool sistim. Whatdya xpect? Dat be so funy. U made mee laf. I goed to publik skool to.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Thanks for your response. Even the example you gave you said it was the parent's responsibility.
Not sure how you can interpret the passage in Deuteronomy any other way than God expects parents to train their children.
I am glad that you agree with me. Once again, there is nothing in any of my posts that says it is anything other than a parent's responsibility to educate their children.
The responsibilities and authority of both the parent and the state are God-given and when rightly exercised go hand in hand.
The God-given responsibility of parents to educate does not bestow God-given rights to fail, neglect or abuse their children's education.
Children need to be rescued from cultic Mormon compounds in Utah just as much as they need to rescued from Muslim Madrassas in Kandahar and Dearborn. Unless your hate them, in which case leave them to be abused.
Rufus wrote: Curious choice of terms. Collective society, collectivism, communism?
And all the men of his city - is collective. All that is curious is your choice of question.
Gymnast wrote: It was also the parents' responsibility to handover their stubborn and rebellious sons to the elders of the city ... and the collective society's responsibility to execute them. Dt 21:18-21. The two spheres of authority go hand in hand together. The faulty hermeneutic is yours.
Thanks for your response. Even the example you gave you said it was the parent's responsibility. But, honestly, we are talking about education and you start in about civil punishment. I am sure some kids in school might agree with your analogy but you are not comparing apples to apples. Again, it is NOT the responsibility of the government to educate our children. We, as a society, have given that to them, but it is not their job. It is the responsibility of the parents and if the government can come in to your home school and arbitrarily decide you are not educating your kids then it is a sad day indeed. One thing that can be demonstrated, is they are not doing a good job at it. Not sure how you can interpret the passage in Deuteronomy any other way than God expects parents to train their children.
Gymnast, WHO was responsible to hand over THEIR kids?
You fault your own argument. "Collective society" could not come in and take them. Besides, you are talking about a most serious crime against God, not day-to-day living.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: in Israel it was the parents responsibility to train their children.
It was also the parents' responsibility to handover their stubborn and rebellious sons to the elders of the city ... and the collective society's responsibility to execute them. Dt 21:18-21.
The two spheres of authority go hand in hand together.
Duet. 6:4-7 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. (KJV) Seeing there are multiple comments about the government's authority, I challenge you to find ANYWHERE in the law of the land (US Constitution) a requirement that government have anything to do with providing a child's education. Abusive parents are dealt with under state law, not putting your child in the government "education" system is not abuse. The verses at the beginning of this post show God's precedent was for parents to educate their children, and how in the world can you say Proverbs 22:6 does not apply to parents, your hermeneutics are way off on that one seeing that in Israel it was the parents responsibility to train their children.
Gymnast wrote: And yet we are to love our Mormon neighbour's children
and not leave them to their evil and abusive parents adopting a hear no evil see no evil cowardly approach for fear of what may come upon us. For perfect love casts out fear.
Mike wrote: Amen Rufus Christians are sometimes all to eager to call in the government on those they disagree with in a religious sense. The forget government legalism operates on a precedent system. It is foolishness for Christians to invite it to intercede where they don't belong, for it opens the door to come after Christians in the future.
And yet we are to love our Mormon neighbour's children.
Rufus wrote: Please forgive the interjection as I don't mean to get involved with ya'lls friendly dispute. However, it is not a God-given duty for the state to be in anyway involved in the education of children. Training up a child falls into the realm of family government. Any forced involvement of the state or other entity into this realm is out of order and should be resisted regardless of whether it is Mormons or Christians who are having their authority usurped.
Amen Rufus
Christians are sometimes all to eager to call in the government on those they disagree with in a religious sense. The forget government legalism operates on a precedent system. It is foolishness for Christians to invite it to intercede where they don't belong, for it opens the door to come after Christians in the future.
Rufus wrote: Murder is within the authority of the civil government to address.
Correct. And biblically the first murder was within a family and punished under the authority of that family. However the Bible demonstrates that this power of authority was extended to the state. This was not a usurpation.
The state likewise has power to punish all manner of evil without usurping the primary role of the family in the training, rearing, admonition and education of children. This is what the 1901 judgment holds and supports.
You are presenting a false dichotomy, when in reality the two should ideally work hand in hand in obedience to God.
Adjective 1. More important than anything else; supreme. 2. Having supreme power. Synonyms supreme - sovereign - chief - top - uppermost -topmost
Thanks for a new word of the day for me. This is one of those powerful sounding words that I'd like to add to my vocabulary. Tantamount is another that I'd like to get more use out of.
Gymnast wrote: Rufus - you are also giving your personal opinions (which are an argument from silence, not from the Bible). I am not the government nor have I asserted a desire to be such. There is no peace when the people advocate rebellion.
Where do you draw the line? What if the parent kills a child in the course of their parenting, training and admonition? What if a sibling acting in loco parentis kills a child? Is this a purely internal family matter? You need to be consistent and follow your position to its logical conclusion. I submit that the absurdity of your position is more self-evident than the pursuit of happiness.
If civil government usurps the authority of ecclesiastical or family government, it is the civil government that is in rebellion.
Murder is within the authority of the civil government to address.
Rufus - you are also giving your personal opinions (which are an argument from silence, not from the Bible). I am not the government nor have I asserted a desire to be such.
There is no peace when the people advocate rebellion.
Rufus wrote: There should be zero civil government laws relative to the training of children.
Where do you draw the line? What if the parent kills a child in the course of their parenting, training and admonition? What if a sibling acting in loco parentis kills a child? Is this a purely internal family matter? You need to be consistent and follow your position to its logical conclusion. I submit that the absurdity of your position is more self-evident than the pursuit of happiness.
35
There are a total of 54 user comments displayed | add new comment |
COMMENTS | 
mike from new york: "
lisa
---
i don't condone this gay persecution of..."
