Posted on 01/25/2012 12:27:51 PM PST by scripter
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Last night in his State of the Union address President Obama called on all states to raise their school compulsory attendance age to 18, unnecessarily adding to bureaucratic requirements for homeschoolers.
Homeschool advocates at the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) are dedicated to protecting the educational relationship between parents and their children. Parents—not the federal government and certainly not the president—are the ones who should decide how children are educated and when they’re ready to graduate from high school.
But President Obama presumptively spoke on behalf of parents and the states: “So tonight, I am proposing that every state—every state—requires that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn 18.”
Michael Farris, founder and chairman of HSLDA, expressed the shock felt by homeschoolers: “There appears to be no limit to the president’s desire for power. Car companies, banks, doctors, and now schools and the family. He’s gone way too far this time.”
State-mandated attendance has not been the historical norm. In 1642, the Massachusetts Bay Colony stipulated that parents provide religious instruction for their children. For the next 200 years, most education laws were minimal and focused on family-centered education, giving children the tools to read, write, and do arithmetic, helping them understand what it meant to be virtuous citizens, and allowing them to learn a trade.
Ultimately, a formulaic and compulsory approach to education fails to instill in children a love of learning or a quality education. HSLDA President J. Michael Smith confirmed, “HSLDA has consistently protected homeschool families from the harmful effects of compulsory attendance education in their states, reinforcing the parental right to choose the method and duration of education most fitting to the individual needs and gifts of their children.”
Home School Legal Defense Association is a nonprofit advocacy organization established to defend and advance the constitutional right of parents to direct the education of their children and to protect family freedoms. Visit us online at www.hslda.org
I had some extended family living in a state where the compulsory age was 16. They had a son who hooked up with the wrong crowd and started getting in trouble. His dad tried to put him into a parochial school where he’d get more structure and better guidance. But the kid did not like it, and when he turned 16 he dropped out. His father was told that was the law, and there was nothing he could do about it.
Then he kept getting in trouble with the cops. The police kept bringing him back to his dad. The dad was in a Catch 22 because he was still responsible for the kid for two more years, but could not legally force him to go back to school. And legally he could not kick the kid out either.
This is a stupid and untenable legal situation. Age of majority and compulsory attendance need to be the same.
He needs two more years to DUMB DOWN the public school (or as NY City spelpt it shcool) student, so they be WONDERFUL socialists.
mandatory age 18 is just mandated indoctrination and
MOST IMPORTANT mandated teacher union employment pay off.
School till 18 means more teachers means more union dues funneled to democrats.
According to STAR testing, my home-educated kids were intellectually ready to attend college at the age of 10. There is no way in hell I would ever allow them to remain in a school just to make life easier for incompetent teachers.
FUBO
“spelpt it shcool”
Sorry! But sometimes typos are funny!
By the time I was 18 I had an associates degree and was in a four year school. No diploma from anyone that the government would recognize because that’s what worked for us.
1) The need to report to some sniveling government bureaucrat for two extra years.
For example: My children were accepted to college at the ages of 13, 12, and 13. Even though they were in **college**, I was still required to hand in time consuming portfolios of their work every 6 months. The unctuous earth worm ( Ph.D.) accepting these portfolios would **not** accept an official transcript from the community college as proof that they were being adequately educated.
2) Many states will use this mandate to raise the minimum age for taking the GED to 18 or higher. In Maryland at the time we lived there, the age was 16. Passing this exam would have immediately made my children available for state university scholarships and aid. We moved to a different state and there the age for taking the GED was 18. Well!...Two of my kids were **finished** with their B.S. degrees in mathematics by the age of 18 and there were state or federal government scholarships available for them!
If children are denied access to scholarships, then more children will remain in the government schools just to qualify for them.
It even effects those applying to the military, whose rules vary from year to year. At times just having a GED was enough. Other times, some community college was needed if one did not have an official high school diploma. If the GED age is 18, then scholarships for those community college courses will be withheld from the younger student.
The GED and high school drop-out age are closely tied in many states. In my opinion, any child of any age who passes the GED should be given an official diploma from their local high school. All children should be able to pass it to graduate. ( Nearly all would fail.) And...All teachers should take the GED every three years, if they fail they should be fired.( Most would fail the mathematics section.)
This is ridiculous!
I graduated from a public High School at age 17.
(simply by virtue of a late b’day, not superior intellect)
If the requirement is “graduation” what does “age” have to do with anything?
Now, if you suggest the states may further encumber “graduation” requirements, that is a different story and should be slammed at the state and local level.
unctuous earth worms work for somebody and a public pounding is a suitable alternative.
I recognize your frustration, but it is the implementation of Obamas “words” that require scrutiny.
As usual, the words are delivered with butter, but is his intent that must be suspect.
Mike and I were in Park Jr. High Chess Club, back in the 60’s, I’ll try again to contact him to see how we can help.
Mike Farris, I should clarify, since there are two “Mike’s” in the article.
sheeesh!
That was 1965/66.....
He was 2 years ahead of me.
My youngest home schooler is 15, and is going to start college this summer (when he gets his driver license). As a home school parent, under the state law, I define how he studies to meet the general requirements of studies, and those would be served by his going to college. Here's the state code on what subjects are expected to be taught (home, private and public):
High Schools (9-12): language arts, math, science, social studies, the arts, physical and health education, career and technical education, educational technology, general financial literacy, and library media skills. Utah Admin. Code R277-700-6.
However, if the CIC's (commie in chief's) proposed federal mandate is that all children attend government school until they turn 18, that's a whole nuther matter.
If the tenth amendment is toast, then so's the first and second. Nullification? Game on!
I'm gonna go read that old time declaration just one more time, and La Bamba Zero Soretoroski can kiss my grits.
That there is an age restriction on taking the GED meant that our children never qualified for state university or community college scholarships. I do know that it could impact those homeschoolers wanting to join the military.
My three homeschoolers are now past their mid-twenties. Two have masters degrees. Of these, one has a masters in accounting and the other a masters in mathematics. The youngest earned a B.S. in mathematics and is currently working full-time and working on a second undergraduate degree.
You forgot the fourth which will be violated to Big Brother you and finally the fifth to incarcerate you.
So true.
I’m somewhat surprised you didn’t cite the 9th, as it supports the tenth...
The Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is somewhat of an enigma. It provides that the naming of certain rights in the Constitution does not take away from the people rights that are not named. Yet neither the language nor the history of the Ninth Amendment offers any hints as to the nature of the rights it was designed to protect.
Every year federal courts are asked to recognize new Unenumerated Rights “retained by the people,” and typically they turn to the Ninth Amendment. However, the federal judiciary does not base rulings exclusively on the Ninth Amendment; the courts usually cite the amendment as a secondary source of fundamental liberties. In particular, the Ninth Amendment has played a significant role in establishing a constitutional right to privacy.
Ratified in 1791, the Ninth Amendment is an outgrowth of a disagreement between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists over the importance of attaching a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. When the Constitution was initially drafted by the Framers in 1787, it contained no Bill of Rights. The Anti-Federalists, who generally opposed ratification because they believed that the Constitution conferred too much power on the federal government, supported a Bill of Rights to serve as an additional constraint against despotism. The Federalists, on the other hand, supported ratification of the Constitution without a Bill of Rights because they believed that any enumeration of fundamental liberties was unnecessary and dangerous
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.