Good morning.
- Bad news from Burma.
- Clock as tech art.
- The bottom billion problem.
- A quote.
- Strength.
- Some remarks on the Giro.
- What is not the point of creation.
- EO is rebooting.
- A countdown.
- Mr Fernandez offers some links.
- Some words on immigration.
- Sex and the
single, err, simple virus. - A recommendation for Castle.
- Memory and monument.
Some words on immigration.
WTF? Did you really just link to a piece arguing that Muslims shouldn’t be allowed to immigrate to the United States?
JA,
Uhm, newsflash. I don’t always agree with that to which I link. Links are inspire discussion, to provide information, and to provoke.
The question raised, ultimately, is how cultures that support norms of childhood treatment that our far outside what we normally find acceptable affect parenting rights of the rest, and specifically those who don’t want to necessarily cede the responsibility of education to the state. Ms McGrew suggests limiting or eliminating Islamic immigration, or more the the point cultures which have “father/daughter beating” as a cultural norm. What do you suggest or do you deny this is a problem at all?
It is largely due to the accident that the culture of our educators today is highly liberalized that the left does not find home schooling a think deserving of state respect and possible support. What if a future educational environment decided maths (and therefore science) education was for the birds. But … parental privacy laws and restrictions on home schooling made it not legal to educate your kid in subjects which you now think essential. That would be bad. You yourself might suggest that extensive immigration of groups which necessitate loss of privacy intruding on parental rights would suddenly become a bad thing.
Mark,
“Uhm, newsflash. I don’t always agree with that to which I link. Links are inspire discussion, to provide information, and to provoke.”
Okay, fair enough. But generally when you disagree, you provide a snarky comment or question, right? I guess I shouldn’t assume.
Ms McGrew suggests limiting or eliminating Islamic immigration, or more the the point cultures which have “father/daughter beating” as a cultural norm. What do you suggest or do you deny this is a problem at all?
I honestly don’t know the extent of the problem. Immigrants certainly should be made aware that this practice is not only looked down upon but blatantly illegal, and they should be prosecuted and have their kids taken away if they can’t restrain themselves.
If you want to keep child-beaters from immigrating, I’m okay with that (with some reasonable statute of limitations, etc.) but you can’t keep out everybody who practices Islam!
It is largely due to the accident that the culture of our educators today is highly liberalized that the left does not find home schooling a think deserving of state respect and possible support.
I don’t agree with your premise. The left looks down on ignorant and unqualified creationist parents homeschooling their kids to keep them sheltered from the real world, but I don’t think the left thinks that the state shouldn’t at least respect if not support home-schooling.
But … parental privacy laws and restrictions on home schooling made it not legal to educate your kid in subjects which you now think essential.
WTF? What is it not legal to educate your kid in now?
JA,
On the last, two points. Germany at the very least is creating laws prohibiting home schooling. Given the left’s fond appreciation for foreign jurisprudence and norms in legal circles that might give you pause. Second, why do you suspect that home schoolers find they need a legal defense fund if there is no legal issues with home schooling presently?
On the last, two points. Germany at the very least is creating laws prohibiting home schooling. Given the left’s fond appreciation for foreign jurisprudence and norms in legal circles that might give you pause.
LOL, so any law anywhere in the world might “give me pause.”
Second, why do you suspect that home schoolers find they need a legal defense fund if there is no legal issues with home schooling presently?
You are king of moving the goalposts. We were talking about whether it was legal to homeschool and to educate your kid in anything you want. Now you’re tryin gto prove that they ever have “legal issues.”
Well, duh. The state requires homeschooling lives up to certain standards. It doesn’t forbid you from teaching anything, though, just insists that you do teach some things (math, reading, etc.)
It’s interesting here that we have one post about whether Muslim immigrants abuse female family members and another about the horror that homeschooling might actually require some hurdles to jump through….
Does anyone sense that perhaps there’s a connection here? In a liberal democratic society parents are given preference in making decisions regarding their kids but it is just that, a preference. The larger community maintains a secondary interest in seeing that kids are raised in a decent manner consistent with our overall values.
Boonton,
Which is why the post suggested a the a Constitutional amendment delineating parental rights might be a good thing. Do you really think the community has the overriding responsibility for the upbringing of children?
Yes it does. Do you disagree?
Boonton,
No. I vehemently disagree. I think society has the responsibility to protect its citizens from each other with respect to harm. First and final responsibility for raising my kids rest with me (and my wife) alone.
First but not final. You have a responsibility to raise your kids to society and if you fail to do so society has a right and duty to step in. This follows exactly from its responsibility to protect its citizens from each other. Children who are not raised are a danger to themselves and others. So yes if you want to homeschool you should jump through a few hurdles to establish that you are *really* homeschooling and not engaging in something harmful.
Boonton,
And if a society fails to educate my child, it remains mine. The responsibility remains mine, first and final. You haven’t convinced me. You prefer the nanny state too fondly.
That being said, I’m not dogmatically against oversight . Standardized tests of this sort would be my recommendation (a post from long long time ago). Why would not testing be enough for oversight?