View Single Post
Old March 25th, 2008, 8:43 pm
flimseycauldron's Avatar
flimseycauldron  Female.gif flimseycauldron is offline
Zonko's Employee
Join Date: 21st February 2007
Location: New England
Posts: 3,553
Re: Should homeschooling be illegal?

Wasn't there a thread about homeschooling not too long ago? Regardless, I am not here to defend homeschooling. Some people agree with it some people do not. For those who don't believe in it they are not forced to do it. That isn't going to change.

The issue here is whether or not it should be legal. And the answer is of course it should be. This isn't just an issue about education. It is an issue about parental rights and parental responsibilty. It also covers exactly how much of a role the government should play in raising our children.

When it comes to law there has to be legal precedent i.e. the judge (s) in question can't just arbitrarily hand down verdicts based on their feelings. How I choose to raise my child, and how my next door neighbor chooses to raise his child, may be totally opposite. How a judge may raise his child may be totally different than how anyone else raises their child. Other than extreme cases of abuse or neglect what standard can be applied that defines how a person should contribute to society? What standard can be universally applied that would determine who is a detriment to society? The answer, of course, is that there isn't a universal standard of what is acceptable and what is not. Much less a legal definition.

There is nothing specific to the Constitution that says homeschooling is legal. However, by the same token there is nothing in the constitution that says it is not. The Constitution does, though, cover any number of civil liberties which would be infringed upon if homeschooling were to be outlawed.

In fact, the whole issue of homeschooling in the courts is primarily based upon the idea of neglect. If homeschooling were outlawed it basically makes the burden of proof go to the parents (i.e that they weren't neglectful), versus the burden of proof go to the state. I'm fairly certain that such a thing is unconstitutional. If the courts can decide, to that extent, what is neglectful or not, what's to keep the courts from intruding even further on divorce proceeding and taking the child away from both parents and placing the child in foster care? (As of course it could be seen as emotionally abusive to put the child through a divorce proceeding.)

Legally it is treading on dangerous waters. The ruling in California is being appealed but my gut feeling (which makes me cringe) is that this is going all the way to the Supreme Court.


Last edited by flimseycauldron; March 25th, 2008 at 8:46 pm.
Sponsored Links