And you thought schools were only teaching your kids how to add, subtract, and use condoms.
How naive.
Welcome to a nation where parenthood is increasingly viewed as a joint project between you and state officials.
Take, for instance, the inclination to push politically motivated school curriculums. Across the country, there has been an outcry — rightly so — when local Christian-heavy school boards attempt to teach evolution as fiction or refer to a fetus as a living entity. Appalling, indeed. Well, especially appalling when you disagree with the syllabus.
Recently, California passed two bills that would dictate that state schools use textbooks containing cultural and sexual definitions many parents deem objectionable.
Don’t like it? Tough luck.
Another California legislator recently carried a bill that would mandate the teaching of “climate change” science to kids. Whether the parents happen to be interested in such globally conscious instruction is irrelevant.
This kind of educational requirement might be a no-brainer to forward-thinking parents, but other obtuse moms and dads aren’t interested in participating in a majoritarian system when it comes to their children’s education.
This is one of the many reasons we’re witnessing an explosion of home-schooling in the nation. California, in fact, has nearly 200,000 home-schooled kids, and according to a U.S. Department of Education estimate, more than 1 million kids are home-schooled nationwide.
Though not for everyone (some of us need that alone time), home-schooling families have often seen their children excel, regularly out-scoring students in public schools. Yet, home-schooling families had also better start worrying about their future and start pledging fealty to the state. (Seriously.)
A California state appellate court last week ruled that it is now illegal for parents to teach children without specific credentials. “Parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children,” claims the ruling. “Parents who fail to [comply with school enrollment laws] may be subject to a criminal complaint against them . . . .”
Exactly what the ruling will mean in practical terms for California is still being debated — and the decision will be appealed — but what it signifies regarding the direction of country is inarguable.
Lloyd Porter, a member of the board of directors of the California Teachers Association, stated after the ruling that he was “happy” about the decision. Of course he is.
Teachers unions across the nation have led the charge against this radical practice of educating children beyond the safe confines of a state-controlled facility.
Unnecessarily dramatic, you say? Well, the very decision union leaders are so pleased with offers us a glimpse into this thinking.
In the judge’s view — based on precedent — he contends: “A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare.”
A “primary purpose” of education is to train children to be loyal to the state? I don’t sense that kids are graduating with an especially strong understanding of the Constitution. So one wonders what “state” we’re talking about?
Besides, “good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state” sounds more like a slogan from a Soviet-era propaganda poster than the basis for education in a free nation — especially when you consider the characters running education in this country.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, fortunately, came out against the ruling, stating that “Every California child deserves a quality education and parents should have the right to decide what’s best for their children.”
Allowing parents the freedom to teach their own children? Now, that’s what I call “good citizenship.”
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at 303-954-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com.
