Oh my. What an interesting time we seem to be living in. There appear to be a recent proliferation of concerns about a number of different issues (gun violence/control and economy/taxation are a couple of examples). One thing I have noticed while perusing the many different opinions is the use of the word ‘fundamental’. Whether it’s a fundamental right, or a fundamental liberty, it’s used as part of an argument to bolster an individual’s assertion or position. Maybe it’s just me, but simply describing something as fundamental doesn’t immediately or automatically make it so. I guess people presume you’ve done the research because they don’t back up this assertion with any evidence. I may not be from Missouri, but I do tend to follow the state’s motto ‘show me’.
A very recent example of this use of fundamental is the to a certain degree implied argument that people around the world have a fundamental right to homeschool (my children are homeschooled, and I greatly value the opportunity given – full disclosure). I’ve looked at the situation which brought this out. To (greatly) summarize the situation: a German family began homeschooling their children in 2006, in violation of German law. After being fined (and nothing I found says they paid the fines), and having German authorities come to their house and take their children to public school, they were asked by Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) to move to the United States in 2008. Once they arrived they applied for asylum (they had other countries in Europe they could have chosen). The basis of their asylum application was they were being persecuted for homeschooling in accordance with their religious beliefs. The asylum case is now in front of a federal circuit court. An immigration judge in January 2010 granted them asylum, an immigration appeals court judge denied it in May of 2012. The case is currently in front of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals with oral arguments in April 2013. The United States government is arguing against granting asylum. The government’s argument is: the family isn’t being persecuted or singled out for their religious beliefs by the law, as Germany does not allow anyone to homeschool their children. HSLDA is providing legal representation for the family and puts forward the following counterargument: the family is being persecuted because homeschooling is a matter of individual liberty and is therefore a ‘fundamental right’. Now, I’m no lawyer (and I don’t play one on TV), but the issue here is the application of the asylum law. In short, people are granted asylum if they can demonstrate they are being persecuted for religious reasons or because they belong to a particular social group.
Now, please keep in mind I am a homeschooling father so I am approaching this from a pro-homeschooling perspective. Here is how I see homeschooling involved in this situation: Both the United States and Germany (as well as a number of other countries) have addressed the issue of homeschooing in their laws. The United States allows it, with each individual state applying its own requirements. Germany (I know the German homeschooling law was made in 1938, so please don’t use the Hitler argument. Please?) forbids it. I know the law in my state, and I follow it. Maybe I disagree with it, but I still follow it. I have difficulty believing one of the rights upon which all other rights are built (which is one of the definitions of fundamental) is to homeschool. There may be (I can’t think of any off the top of my head) countries where there is no educational system whatsoever (there are most certainly communities where this is the case). Are we to provide those communities with homeschooling curriculum, because it’s a fundamental right? That might be akin to that community being Eve, and we are the serpent providing them with the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It’s an application of our culture and beliefs without consideration of their culture.
Another argument is that homeschooling is essential to freedom of thought. This argument assumes the parents cannot tell their children what the school is teaching them goes against their religious beliefs. I cannot count the number of times my wife or I have commented to our children (either during an event or after) we did not believe something presented because of our religion. We also explained to our children WHY we didn’t believe that idea or concept. Yes, it’s work. It can be difficult. But sooner or later, our children leave us and they will encounter these things through their interactions in society. When we take the time to explain why we disagree with something, we are teaching our children freedom of thought. We are also teaching them logic and apologetics.
Since religion has been introduced as an issue, let me put this forward. From a religious perspective, the imperative to ‘be subject to the governing authorities’ stated in Romans 13:1 appears to be ignored in this situation. Not paying the fines levied (bad law or not) is not being subject to the governing authorities. Not only this, but we are to live peaceably with our neighbors. How peaceable were they being towards their neighbors when they brought the authorities into their neighborhood? Or with the media attention they brought in with their cause celebre? Before you respond, I know the counterargument is from Acts chapter 5 where Peter tells the Jews they must obey God rather than men. I haven’t found a passage in the Bible where it commands us to homeschool our children.
I understand there are those who are concerned that this case shows the U.S. governments ‘anti-homeschooling’ bias and this is a harbinger of coming persecution against American homeschoolers. As I stated above, the case involves granting asylum, not whether or not one of the questions on a future immigration form will be ‘do you intend to homeschool your children?’ Maybe I’m a Pollyanna, or I’m stupid, but I just don’t see persecution coming because of that particular choice. Maybe because my reason for homeschooling is about the quality of the education my children receive instead of being based on a moral imperative. Please let me reiterate: I’m thankful for the opportunity and the ability to homeschool, and do not want that taken away. On the other hand, I’m not going to be a ‘chicken little’ responding with fright just because the government mentions the word ‘education’. If I did, I will miss situations that are or will be a matter of concern. But hey, what do I know?
No comments:
Post a Comment