Posted on 03/12/2009 7:34:22 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
Loyal to Liberty
In my last post, as I listed areas of life where the imposition of socialist tyranny will produce the enslavement of conscience, I referred to the fact that "Parents will be required, without exception to surrender their children for indoctrination by the state." I'm sure the usual purblind skeptics dismissed the thought as another example of rhetorical hyperbole. Providence came to its defense today in the form of a report out of North Carolina where "a judge has ordered three children to attend public schools this fall because the homeschooling their mother has provided over the last four years needs to be 'challenged.' The children, however, have tested above their grade levels - by as much as two years."
Judge Ned Mangum did not usurp Ms. Mills right to decide the best education for her children because the schooling she provided was academically deficient. He is reported to have "stated that his decision was not ideologically or religiously motivated but that ordering the children into public schools would 'challenge the ideas you've taught them.'" As reported, I'm not sure whether that statement is an example of self-evident dishonesty or shocking ignorance, but either way it makes hash out of the notion that Mangum is better qualified than their mother to decide the educational path of her children. The word "ideological" literally refers to that which gives an account of ideas, or is done on account of them. So if he sends the children to public schools in order to make sure the mother's ideas are challenged his decision is precisely ideological. If, when he made the statement, he knew the meaning of the word, then he spoke dishonestly. If he did not know it, then he revealed such deficiency in his own education as to raise serious doubts about his qualifications to make judgments about anyone else's. (In the U.S. lawyers get a doctorate when they graduate from law school, right?)
But the deeper issue goes beyond this or any other judge's capacity or qualifications. It has rather to do with the natural right of parents to fulfill their responsibility before God for their children's upbringing. A mother who seeks to assure that her children will receive an education that reflects her conscientious beliefs as to their moral welfare, does precisely what the laws of nature and of nature's God require of her. She does what is right. In light of her right, the state (including any judge acting on its behalf) is obliged to refrain from interference with her action unless, by dint of proven wrongdoing, it can assert the obligation to act on behalf of some superior right of the children (or their other parent) to prevent or correct the wrong. No such wrongdoing has been suggested in this case. In fact her husband, whose adultery his lawyer admits to be the cause of their ruined marriage, acknowledges that Ms. Mills "has done a good job with the homeschooling of the children."
Judge Mangum is reported to have said that "public school would 'prepare these kids for the real world and college' and allow them 'socialization'. But if his idea of socialization includes the need to challenge the Christian ideas their mother has taught them, then he not only interferes with her natural right to raise up her children, he tramples on one of the most important elements of the free exercise of religion. When one individual or group forcibly takes away the children of another in order to raise those children according to beliefs foreign to the beliefs and conscience of their parents, it is an unconscionable act of injustice and bigotry. What this judge does under specious color of law is no different than what their Spanish persecutors once did to Jewish People in Spain, or what American slaveholders in the nineteenth century did to the children torn away from their mothers to be sold into slavery in some distant state.
It may be to our credit that we speak of these things calmly, and seek to settle them by peaceful means in our courts of law. But this decent restraint should not lead us to forget the enormity of the issues involved; issues that have throughout human history roused deep indignation, humiliation and implacable anger, such as eventually ignite the heart's dry timber of grievance into the consuming flames of hateful war. As good people have lived and sacrificed to do right by their children, so also they have died, if need be.
Are we now so distracted by our little pleasures and playthings that we have no sense of the wounds we are inflicting upon the hearts and consciences of decent people? They know that the higher law of justice demands that they resist tyranny, even though black robed and velvet gloved. They must especially resist it when it reaches into their homes to deliver their children to what their consciences declare to be corruption. Our founding creed says that we should suffer while evils are sufferable. Children are done to death in the womb. Their parents' rights and duty towards them cast aside in the courts. All in the midst of times when the Constitution that may be the highest manifestation of our common sense of law and justice is treated with no more respect than an old TV guide.
When will it be enough to rouse us from complacency? When will we see enough to make out the pattern before our eyes? We see the disparate elements. We react to each with a little outburst, a little temper, perhaps a little prayer. But from a judge's usurpation of a mother's natural right to educate her children, to what may be the contemptuous usurpation of the highest office in the land, the elements come together to evince a design. Is it the design for despotism of which our Founders spoke? Despotism is such an odd and unfamiliar sounding word: so rarely used, so little understood. But this ignorance too has its place in the design. It's hard to rouse hearts to meet danger when the words to describe it have gone out of style. "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty…" to let arrogant judges, politicians and bureaucrats dispose of the souls of their children, and the charter of their liberty, and the future of their country. Is that how it goes? Is that how you remember it?
For more current writing from Alan Keyes, please visit LoyaltoLiberty.com!
Here we go again.......
I would love to compare these Home-schooled kid’s scores on basic aptitude tests compared to their public school counterparts.
FYI
He could have been our first "black" president. I tried.
I don’t understand why the judge was ruling on anything at all. What action was before him and who brought it?
Usually the HSLDA is involved in cases like this. I havent heard anything from them, yet.
bump and *ping*
Further confirming that “no” for any potential move to NC.
When to comes to raising children, Mothers know best.
In a divorce proceeding the father is against homeschooling.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91397
The judge, when contacted by WND, explained his goal in ordering the children to register and attend a public school was to make sure they have a “more well-rounded education.”
“I thought Ms. Mills had done a good job [in homeschooling],” he said. “It was great for them to have that access, and [I had] no problems with homeschooling. I said public schooling would be a good complement.”
The judge said the husband has not been supportive of his wife’s homeschooling, and “it accomplished its purposes. It now was appropriate to have them back in public school.”
Mangum said he made the determination on his guiding principle, “What’s in the best interest of the minor children,” and conceded it was putting his judgment in place of the mother’s.
And he said that while he expressed his opinion from the bench in the court hearing, the final written order had not yet been signed.
However, the practice of a judge replacing a parent’s judgment with his own regarding homeschooling was argued recently when a court panel in California ruled that a family would no longer be allowed to homeschool their own children.
>>I can’t understand why this man cannot get elected to something,........ anything. He sounds radical to most people because he has “founding father” type qualities. Isn’t that desirable in a candidate today?
He could have been our first “black” president. I tried.<<
I have always admired Dr. Keyes. He is not afraid to speak out on what he thinks is right, and that rubs a lot of people the wrong way. The last 20 years really haven’t been kind to Keyes, since he worked for the Reagan White House, but hopefully, now the time is right for someone like him who is not afraid to speak up for what he thinks is right. I’ll support him all the way.
FWIW, that web site is tremendous and I have been reading it everyday for the last few weeks.
It seems the dad is driving this. The judge is also the judge handling the parent’s divorce.
I think it is growing less & less to our credit all the time.
“Parents will be required, without exception to surrender their children for indoctrination by the state.”
At which point, “parents will be required” to “shoot the bastards that show up on the doorstep to enforce this action.”
Judge orders homeschoolers into public district classrooms
Decides children need more 'focus' despite testing above grade levels
From what I recall it’s a divorce and one partner is now opposed to home schooling. No doubt because it limits time with the children.
I am not surprised at all of this. I attended private schools most of my life except my freshman year in high school (due to a move). I was put in all the advanced classes, yet I recall that most of what was taught I already studied in the fifth or sixth grade in private schools.
I think his eloquence and passion scare most people. Just as Reagan scared many people, I don’t think the average voter will ever give him a shot at anything. Even many Freepers here will pile onto him if he ever gets a foothold in Federal politics. He lives in Chicago, so he is in conservative oblivion. He ran against Obama for Senate and I don’t think he got 30%. That’s a modern day “George Washington” against a mental midget and we get the midget.
What does that leave? Rectally extracted?
I like what he says here. I have even changed ny tagline to reflet a quote from Keys.
“What action was before him and who brought it?”
It’s a messy divorce caused by adultery (man’s) and the man doesn’t want to have to pay for the expense of homeschooling any longer.
Depending on the subject; they scored at grade level, and up to 2 grades ahead.
They did this to themselves by allowing the court to interfere.
There must be more to this story because HSLDA has not intervened as of yet.
And yes I am sympathetic toward these children. They are going through enough with this divorce, let alone facing the thought of entering Public school.
But there is still something nagging me about this particular case. I've been bashed on other threads pertaining to this divorce.
I think a lot of people are looking at this through a microscope and are avoiding the larger picture.
Test scores would be undoubtedly higher. The problem is test scores are only one of a set of movable markers. As soon as "we" think the marker is set firmly, "they" propose another. As in "socialization." As in "challenging" the ideas of the parents.
It's a statement on how far we have fallen from our founding principles. Keyes is one of our finest statesmen, but the media (and the RNC) treat him with disdain. I swear, George Washington couldn't be elected today!!
Read the article:"The children, however, have tested above their grade levels - by as much as two years."
From the mother’s website http://www.hsinjustice.com :
What Can You Do?
This case is still ongoing - we have a chance to make a real difference! Call, fax, or email those in authority to have Judge Mangum removed from this case - so that Venessa Mills can get a fair hearing and homeschoolers can get justice.
1. Forward this message to every person on your contact list, and all those interested in protecting basic American rights. After the right to educate is gone, property and other basic rights will follow.
2. Contact three officials to express your outrage at Venessa Mills’ right to homeschool being taken away and the prejudicial orders of this judge. Three or four short emails or phone calls could be the difference for these kids, and many more like them.
You can reference the case number: #08CVD17753
Judge Mangum’s Supervisors
Judicial Standards Commission
P.O. Box 1122
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
919-831-3630
Don’t be discouraged or think that you can’t make a difference! This case has not been finalized - there’s still time to call for the removal of Judge Mangum - or, at the very least, make him review the facts and deliver a fair judgment.
Every contact counts! Call the numbers on this list to demand justice!
http://www.nccourts.org/County/Wake/Directory.asp
State Legislators
NC Senate-Neal Hunt (R)
919-733-5850
Neal.Hunt@ncleg.net
NC House-Ty Harrell (D)
919-733-5602
Ty.Harrell@ncleg.net
North Carolina Governor
Governor Bev Perdue
Office of the Governor
20301 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-0301
Phone: (919)733-4240
Fax: (919)733-2120
They did this to themselves by allowing the court to interfere.
Surely you jest. I guess you've never been divorced. It's not always so easy to just "settle this matter out of court". This is an obviously biased, activist judge taking the man's/adulterer's side in this case.
That is just the reverse of our family's experience. Our offspring attended private schools K-12, scored high on standardized tests and did very well in college and grad school. We were careful in our choice of schools, which were private but not religious schools, and which acknowledged the place of religion within U.S. history and taught about it respectfully.
He routinely "violated" the "separation of church and state."
God bless him!
I don't think Jesus could get elected today either. In fact, I'm not sure Jesus could get into most churches today. The original "homophobe".
“... expense of homeschooling...”
Guess I’m ignorant. What expense? Some books and materials?
Just how often do judges side with the Men in divorce proceedings? Most often the Mothers have free reign and get everything they want, regardless of the grounds for divorce.
Any divorced men out there want to chime in and let us know how fairly you were treated in court during your divorce?
If this family had been homeschooling, it is apparent that both Mom and Dad had a vested interest in their children. If that is the case, then they would have been able to overlook their hatred for one another and come to some agreement for their children's sake.
Does being divorced make one an expert on all divorces?
How does this mother plan on supporting her children? Does she get full alimony and child support? What kind of income does the father have to support her?
If Dad is already fighting Mom's desire to homeschool and it is because he doesn't want to support her, who are we to believe he will not drop out and Mom will eventually end up on they system so that you and I can support her right to homeschool?
It took two to bring these children into the world, and it will take two to support them. Mom has an equal responsibility to provide for these children.
How will she manage a 40+ hour workweek and still stick to full-time homeschooling?
It's useless of you to try to throw the mother under the bus for not keeping it out of court. A party to a divorce who is being suppoenaed to appear by the other spouse's custody lawyers cannot keep it out of court. The father not only dumped her for someone else; he also wants to pay less support and manipulate the situation so that the mother has less time with the children, and obviously this move helps him even if it hurts the children's education.
It's called "no-fault" divorce, in which moral issues of marriage and role modeling are considered irrelevant to the divorce, the financial arrangement or the custody. It is a wicked system that enriches lawyers and sets up a judge as the boss over private family decisions, destroys the cuckolded or abused spouse, denies them justice, and subverts any moral instruction of the children.
A friend of mine who was a divorce court judge making such decisions over people's families was also an adulterer and drug abuser in his own life. What makes you think this mother got justice? (And it could have happened the same way also to a househusband who taught the kids -- it's just that such a situation is rare.)
As in "socialistizing" society.
When a man has decided that he prefers another woman to his own wife and is hostile about it, the wife has a most difficult time even talking to her husband let alone "settling" anything out of court.
Most men care very deeply about the welfare of their families. Her EX makes a lot of money and wants to pay the least amount of support as possible. He doesn't mind impugning his wife and going for the jugular.
The guy is a rat.
Yes, books and instructional materials cost money and so do field trips and resources like reference books. Also, in a divorce, probably some compensation for the mother's time is part of this dispute.
If the man is prosperous and can afford it, he is the type of man most likely to pay lawyers to remove the influence of the mother from their children, while he sets up the stepmother as a desirable companion to them. It happens all the time, especially with cheating professional men -- doctors, lawyers, executives whose wives stayed home to raise the children while they messed around on the side. Eventually the mistress becomes aggressive or pregnant, and a showdown happens, in which the mother and the children get savaged by the "no-fault" divorce system and the husband's attorneys.
The judge sides with the adulterer father and orders a mental health evaluation for the mother. What a pig.
” the judge also ordered a mental health evaluation for the mother – but not the father – as part of the divorce proceedings, in what Williams described as an attack on the “mother’s conservative Christian beliefs.” “
I often wonder when I hear that, too. We homeschool. We had the books anyway; thousands collected over 50 years or more. I would think your average family ought to have at least the basics lying around, and if not there's always the internet and secondhand book sales online. Material? What, paper and pens, a few other desk items. Gasoline for the field trip, and the price of admittance to the destination. Homeschool doesn't require a $500 curriculum.
Besides that, the school district gets (typically) thousands of tax dollars PER PUPIL, and if you have a child in public school...flame away, but you are receiving a form of welfare. Very few conservatives have situations that justify resorting to "free" public education for their children.
Alan nails it.
“Men cry, peace, peace, but there is no peace...”
I am a homeschooler of 3 and it occupies every aspect of my life.
At the very most I can work outside the home 20 hours a week.
Other than that, it takes a FAMILY, with one parent who takes on full financial responsibility.
Think about the cost of educational materials alone. Then factor in time and money for extra-curricular activities. If you belong to a co-op, there's another cha-ching along with more time dedicated. Library time, where will that fit in? What about homeschool field trips and activities?
What exactly will these children be left to do while Mom is away for 10 or more hours a day? When I work an eight hour shift, I am away from home for 11 hours. 9 hours at work and 2 hours driving. My husband gets home in time to supervise my 15 year old and 12 year old twins. I certainly wouldn't leave them to their own devices.
And aside from that, there are meals to prepare, laundry to wash, bathrooms to clean, floors to be vacuumed and mopped, a yard to be kept up, bills to be paid, Dr. and Dental appointments to be kept, homeschool transcripts to document and lesson plans to prepare.
I could not fit that in along with a 40+ hour workweek.
I'm not throwing Mom under the Bus, but her chances for making this all happen with the best outcome are pretty slim.
During most divorce proceedings, there are plenty of opportunities for mediation before the case is even seen by the judge.
Why, if the dad is at “fault” in this no fault divorce, was the mother asked to have mental evaluations?
Why has HSLDA not intervened? Is there more to this than meets the eye?
As did the Founder dearest to the secular Left, Thomas Jefferson! Gosh, he attended a church service held in the Capitol right after he wrote the infamous letter to the Danbury Baptists! Add to that, he authorized the funding of circuit clergy on the frontier, and for the Christianization of the Indians! Outrageous! /sarc
It’s hard to rouse hearts to meet danger when the words to describe it have gone out of style. “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty…” to let arrogant judges, politicians and bureaucrats dispose of the souls of their children, and the charter of their liberty, and the future of their country. Is that how it goes? Is that how you remember it?
Powerful stuff, It is a shame the country doesn’t appreciate him. Still, his voice is urgently needed
and heeded by those who understand what is at stake.
Any divorced men out there want to chime in and let us know how fairly you were treated in court during your divorce?
You sound like a real fair minded person who wants to hear both sides. Since you already know how women are treated in court you now only want to hear from men. LOL
I admit I am not fair minded, I am a second wife.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.