Saturday, January 29, 2011

Top 7 Ways the Left Is Gunning for Parents

Apologies for Violent Imagery!

There was a time, just a few years ago, when I was the mother of three teenagers, all at once. Being a survivor of this horrifying experience (!) I can attest to the fact that there are times when state-sponsored child raising sounds like a great idea. Hey, maybe a few days (weeks? months?) in foster care would be a nice break for everyone! Haha! Ha! Ha. Okay, wait… this entirely loses its humor in light of what the radical statist leftists have up their sleeves these days.

Let me give you the punchline right now: They want your kids. They don’t want you raising them, they don’t want you teaching them, they don’t want you disciplining them. Bottom line? They want you to get the hell out of the way. And you may be surprised at what they now openly advocate in order to work toward this “utopian vision.”

Make no mistake – this battle is just in its infancy. Another battle the Left is fighting – to normalize, legitimize and push for gay marriage – is now well in hand. Many on both sides of this issue believe that it is only a matter of time before legal and public opinion is nudged over, firmly and permanently, to the Left, and this battle is chalked up in their victory column. Twenty years ago, this would have been unthinkable. So, how’d they do it? Well, early in the battle there were a lot of law school professors writing in support of gay marriage, and then cases starting moving into the courts…

So… what are our friends at the leftist law schools writing about now?

Next: Cancel your appointment at the beauty salon – just reading this will curl your hair…

Just another brick in the wall

7. The Left wants to ban private education and homeschooling

Education is the battleground in question, and the leftists are starting to be more vocal in their insistence that state-sponsored (and union-controlled) public schools be the ONLY option for parents. As in, no private schools. No religious schools. And for heaven’s sake, no homeschooling.

Which reminds me – a big shout out to Michael Farris and the fine folks at Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), who are sounding the alarm on what these leftists are up to. All of the evidence presented in this piece comes courtesy of HSLDA, starting with this gem from the Emory University School of Law. Professor Martha Albertson Fineman lays out a clear case:
“The more appropriate suggestion for our current educational dilemma is that public education should be mandatory and universal. Parental expressive interest could supplement but never supplant the public institutions where the basic and fundamental lesson would be taught and experienced by all American children.”
So Professor Fineman thinks public education is the solution to “our dilemma” – but that’s really a solution to HER dilemma. That is to say, the leftist dilemma of having to compete in the marketplace of ideas. Let’s look at a few more of the good professor’s concerns in detail:
“The long-term consequences for the child being homeschooled or sent to a private school cannot be overstated.”
Indeed! One cannot overstate the threat to the Left from people taught to think for themselves and question the politically correct orthodoxy that passes for education in state schools.
“The total absence of regulation over what and how children are taught leaves the child vulnerable to gaining a sub-par or non-existent education from which they may never recover.”
Hey, you stupid parents who are paying thousands of dollars for private education, or sacrificing a second income so that mom can stay home and teach the kids – your children may NEVER recover from this!!

The unmitigated gall that it takes to write these words absolutely floors me. Surely the professor is not ignorant of the quality of America’s public high school graduates. Surely she is aware that when applied to education, the phrase “sub-par” should be etched in stone over the front doors of most public schools. The asinine assertion that it’s the educators in PRIVATE education who need to be regulated is laughable. And the fact is, she is aware of all this. But her larger agenda is about control, not educational excellence. And note that she doesn’t just want control over how the children are taught (the setting, public or private) – but also WHAT the children are taught.

Next: We arrive at the core of the Left’s discomfort with private education…


6. The Left doesn’t want you deciding what your kids learn

Professor Fineman continues to explain it all to us:
“The risk that parents or private schools unfairly impose hierarchical or oppressive beliefs on their children is magnified by the absence of state oversight or the application of any particular educational standards.”
As the kids say, OMG. This sentence is a doozy and needs to be broken down carefully.

First of all, the implication that any alleged problem is being magnified by the absence of educational standards is just an outright fabrication. No private schools (that want to stay in business) adhere to a policy of ignoring educational standards, and homeschoolers, while subscribing to a wide variety of educational approaches, do not ignore “standards” either. That is just inflammatory language. (If it makes you feel violent, just think about puppies or something.)

Second, the only thing magnified by the lack of state oversight is the inescapable conclusion that state oversight is not needed. There is a reason private and home schooling are both thriving, and it has a whole lot to do with the rotten fruits of “state oversight” at the local public school like dumbed-down (and mistake-ridden) curriculum; toilet bowl test scores; out of control classrooms; tenured teachers who don’t give a rat’s ear about their students (or are having sex with them); politically correct sex education, “diversity training” and “social justice” curriculum at the expense of the three Rs; crime on campus… oh yeah, state oversight is NIFTY.

Third, how do parents/private schools “unfairly impose” anything? Would the professor like to explain how we can “fairly” impose something? Is the fact that the public schools impose the aforementioned mind-numbing politically correct orthodoxy on virtually every subject – is that an example of fair or unfair imposition? Inquiring minds want to know.

Fourth, what are the hierarchical and oppressive belief systems to which she refers, and why is it risky to teach them to kids?

Next: Now we know what they don’t like, but why don’t they like it?

Or not.

5. The Left doesn’t want you repeating what you learned in Sunday school

Fortunately for us, some of the professor’s peers have revealed the source of the “risks” that so worried Professor Fineman. I don’t know, maybe some of these ladies got some bad potato salad at a church picnic or something, because – are they EVER hostile to Christians, who they consider numbskulled and generally icky.

From Northwestern University School of Law, Professor Kimberly Yuracko has another description for what Fineman called “hierarchical and oppressive belief systems.” Yuracko calls them “idiosyncratic and illiberal beliefs and values.” She employed that phrase while discussing her claim that there are legal and constitutional limits on the rights of homeschooling parents to teach such beliefs. Yuracko says new laws must be implemented to mandate government control of educational choices – for certain children, anyway.

Which children? Why, those whose “parents want to teach against the enlightenment.”

Stupid, unenlightened, flat earth society Christians. Of course. These legal elites want the government to strip control away from parents who dare to teach against the “enlightened” view that we’re all here in a big cosmic accident. And lest you be thinking that perchance I am misunderstanding the intent here, allow me to introduce you to Catherine Ross. She teaches law at George Washington Law School, and I think she clarifies the core message quite succinctly in her most informative article entitled “Fundamentalist Challenges to Core Democratic Values: Exit and Homeschooling”:
“This essay explores the choice many traditionalist Christian parents (both fundamentalist and evangelical) make to leave public schools in order to teach their children at home, thus in most instances escaping meaningful oversight.”
Surprised? I thought not. As for meaningful oversight, we already touched on the enormous benefits it bestows on the local public school. Only someone far more enlightened than I am could want those benefits!

Next: The Constitution be damned…


4. The Left weaves fantasy about the Constitution and parental rights

Professor Ross is a veritable fount of leftist information on this topic. Here’s how she unpacks it:
“I am not primarily concerned here with the quality of academic achievement in the core curricular areas among homeschoolers, which has been the subject of much heated debate.”
The “heated debate” part is a cheap shot. There is no debate that most homeschoolers are doing just fine in the “core curricular areas,” thank you very much. But that’s why she doesn’t really want to talk about that.
“My comments focus on civic education in the broadest sense, which I define primarily as exposure to the constitutional norm of tolerance.”
Whoa… what? I’m thumbing through my pocket Constitution, but I am not finding the tolerance section…
“I shall argue that the growing reliance on homeschooling comes into direct conflict with assuring that children are exposed to such constitutional values.”
The only children in America who even know what the Constitution is are those being schooled at home or privately. However, the professor’s “constitutional values” are nothing more than a chilling attack on freedom of religion and parental rights. And this is where they really go off the deep end…

Next: Up is down, black is white, we are tolerant…



3. The Left intolerantly attacks parents, all in the name of tolerance

Ready for trip on the crazy train? All aboard! Your guest conductor today will be Professor Ross:
“In order for the norm of tolerance to survive across generations, society need not and should not tolerate the inculcation of absolutist views that undermine toleration of difference… hence an argument that tolerance for diverse views and values is a foundational principle does not conflict with the notion that the state can and should limit the ability of intolerant homeschoolers to inculcate hostility to differences in their children.”
The mind boggles. Which is greater here, the hypocrisy or the irony? The elevation of tolerance to not only the highest value but the ONLY value is undertaken without blinking an eye, as is the rhetorical sleight-of-hand that allows the professor to presumably argue in favor of tolerance while expressing remarkably bigoted intolerance.

And speaking of inflammatory language, it is way over the top to accuse “intolerant homeschoolers” of inculcating “hostility to differences” in their children. (Hey, Prof – can you tone that down some?) For such an educated person, Professor Ross is remarkably narrow-minded. Teaching a child about differences does not equate to teaching him to hate the differences.

Next: To the Left, God is dead…


2. The Left skews belief in God and Jesus, all to tar parents

In case you’re still a little hazy on which “absolutist” views are not acceptable to Big Brother, Ross spells it out:
“If a parent subscribes to an absolutist belief system premised on the notion that it was handed down by a creator, that it (like the Ten Commandments) is etched in stone and that all other systems are wrong, the essential lessons of a civic education (i.e., tolerance and mutual respect) often seem deeply challenging and suspect. If the core principle in a parent’s belief system is that there is only one immutable truth that cannot be questioned, many educational topics will be off limits… unfortunately, the unavoidable counterpart of a belief in absolute truth is that other belief systems are mistaken at best, and at worst, evil.”
Hey, Prof, does that absolutist thing extend to your absolutist belief in your own worldview? See, you seem pretty sure of yourself, and I think you might be guilty of being… well, absolutist. I could easily rewrite your last statement to say, “Unfortunately, the unavoidable counterpart of a belief in [tolerance/atheism/insert worldview here] is that other belief systems are mistaken at best, and at worst, evil.”

Yeah, that pretty much sums up your view of the whole Judeo-Christian thing. Nevertheless, your hatred toward those values has wickedly skewed your viewpoint. For one thing, a belief in the God of the Bible does not make tolerance and mutual respect “deeply challenging and suspect.” What’s more, unlike you folks on the Left, we don’t have “off-limits” educational topics (although we’re not going to teach that all ideas are equally correct, which is the confusing and meaningless message you teach in the public schools). But let’s look at this from the other side – when’s the last time the public school taught the truth about Christianity’s role in… well, anything? Talk about an off-limits topic! I could name, many, many more verboten subjects – shoot, in a lot of schools you can’t even SAY “merry Christmas”! (I apologize for usage of the term “shoot” and suggest that any crazy folks reading this immediately go to their “happy place” and calm down.)

Anyway. Speaking of high blood pressure, don’t even get me started on the myopia that allows these dimwit professors to write this way about Christian parents while pointedly ignoring Muslim parents.

Which brings us to an important distinction to bear in mind. Christians are not writing, talking, or thinking about restricting anyone’s rights to teach their children anything they want. We may disagree with what the atheist or pagan or Sikh or gay parent or even Muslim teaches their child. But we are not trying to stop them. And that is an important distinction. The party trying to stop Christians (and eventually any parent) from teaching their own child what they wish to teach their own child is the leftist.

Next: And these are the people who are TEACHING our next generation of lawyers?


1. Leftists are screwing with the law to violate all parents

Not all attorneys are evil incarnate. As I mentioned, if it weren’t for the legal eagles at HSLDA, like Michael Farris, all this vomitous would still be under the radar. Thank God for them, because the leftist legal eagles (or as I prefer to think of them, vultures) have it all bass-ackwards. Farris uncovered this downright shocking statement from the aforementioned Professor Yuracko, who rejects:
“…the dominant HSLDA view that parents possess absolute control over their children’s education… Parental control over children’s basic education flows from the state (rather than vice versa). States delegate power over children’s basic education to parents…”
Yeah, uh… loony law professor, can you please show me THAT one in the Constitution?

This is the leftist brain. It simply makes up stuff and then writes it in law journals, and then other leftists read it and think it’s real, and when enough people think that and take it to court and try to force other people to think that, then eventually, it all magically ends up becoming real law.

Unless we fight back.

Speak out and speak the truth. Your rights as a parent – any rights including education – do not flow from the state. You may delegate those rights to the state (usually not a good idea, as mentioned earlier), but make no mistake – YOU delegate the rights. They belong – to YOU.

And make no mistake about this, either. In coming after the Christian homeschoolers, because they hate the concept of absolute truth, the Left will inflict collateral damage in the form of stripping rights from all parents.

Remember that old saying about “First they came for the [fill in the blank] but I didn’t protest because I wasn’t a [fill in the blank]…”

Remember how that works out in the end?

Well, they’re coming for the homeschoolers and the Christians (and especially for the Christian homeschoolers), and that means that soon enough, all parents will be in the crosshairs. They’re gunning for all of us. (Insert “vitriolic rhetoric” disclaimer of your choice here).
—–
So, dear parent, your services are not really needed here in the big global village, except as sperm donors and wombs-for-rent. After filling that part of parental duty, you’re pretty much off the hook. Long gone are the days when Father Knew Best. Now it’s State, or Expert, or Psychologist, or Law Professor Knows Best. And if we stay on this particular track, parents will be an endangered species, and children will suffer for it.

3 comments:

  1. Soooo.... where do I drop them off?

    You are so right in so many ways. I'm a brand spanking new Stay At Home Dad bent on homeschooling my two young daughters. Private school got too expensive and I live in Houston. Public school is not an option.

    I'm a member of THSC (the Texas version of the HSLDA) and they fight every day to secure parents' rights. IN TEXAS! The most family-centric state in the Union. And while homeschooling in Texas is probably WAY easier than anywhere else... the far left is still hard at work here.

    It is unbelievable how many parents want kids, but don't want to raise them.

    Good post. Well written.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks. Sometimes I feel like I'm screaming in the dark, and nobody's listening! :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. So funny to see this today, when just this morning or last night I was thinking "what would I want added to the constitution?" and on the list would be "An amendment that states that parents should have the sole input on their children's educations, and that no one should be forced by law to support an education system they don't believe in."

    ReplyDelete