Posted on 11/24/2009 7:20:44 PM PST by Man50D
The New Hampshire Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of a 10-year-old homeschool girl who has been ordered into a government-run school because she was too "vigorous" in defense of her Christian faith.
As WND reported, a girl identified in court documents as "Amanda" had been described as "well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level."
Nevertheless, a New Hampshire court official determined that she would be better off in public school rather than continuing her homeschool education.
The August decision from Marital Master Michael Garner reasoned that the Amanda's "vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
And this will only get uglier. How dare someone be able to avoid government indoctrination … how dare they!
This is why we join HSLDA !
This family needs to get the hell out of New Hampshire NOW! Not in a million years would I live in a state that tried to usurp their will on the education of my child.
That;s the rationale for head start - “We must get to the children before their parents have instilled their values in them.”
I kid you not. This was printed in a handbook of my state education dept.
NCLUB
(No Child Left Unbrainwashed)
The new democrat policy
This type of government suppression of parent’s rights is one of the reasons that I’m happy my wife and I reside in Texas, where there are no restrictions on home schooling.
Misleading article. The court did not insert itself into a family matter, the parents divorced and then could not agree on how to raise the child, dragging the court into it to settle the issues.
The article, as presented, indicates the court is out of line. However, the article is quite obviously written to propagandize for one angle on the story, not to lay out what happened and leave it up to the reader to decide what it means.
FYI, both my girls were homeschooled, the older one from 9th grade on and the younger from second grade. The younger is now 17.
Never had a bit of trouble with school districts or courts in three different states.
This isn’t a government vs. parents case, it’s a parent vs. parent case. The government is only involved because the parents can’t agree.
Misleading article. The court did not insert itself into a family matter, the parents divorced and then could not agree on how to raise the child, dragging the court into it to settle the issues.
*****************************
The Bible specifically admonishes believers from failing to settle things on their own, and forcing unbelievers to judge between them.
You have to admit though, that the girl will be much better socialized to the real world run by liberals if she just gets used to going to school through metal detectors and walking the halls patrolled by officers armed with Glocks!
Unfortunately, this is a divorce case. Not even HSLDA might’ve helped. At least, HSLDA says it will not get involved in divorce cases/custody battles.
I knew a woman whose children were forced into the public school system by their cheating, abusive father. It took years before she finally won full custody. By then, they’d already been in school for years. The courts tend to side with the parent who wants the children in school. :-(
True, but the point here is: The court system tends to side with the parent who wants the children in public school. It doesn't seem to matter to the court that the child is doing well. And singling out her religious faith as a reason to send her to school is setting a dangerous precedent.
FYI. Very sad.
“Very sad.”
Indeed.
By the illogical logic displayed so far, the child should be taken to Africa, DC, Mexico or Baghdad and exposed to all the wonders of prejudice, hostility, racism, and so forth that she may eventually have to experience. Is there anything stupider than bureaucrats and judges? No wonder the liberals oppose guns. If liberals had guns they would shoot themselves in the feet just to demonstrate the depth of their belief that there are a lot of handicapped who need parking closer to WalMart than is currently available.
with this point of view will they be pulling students out of public school who have not had any contact with religious teaching to gain another point of view?
Sure, this article is written by someone with a biased point of view, but even the court recognized that this 10 year old was “well liked, social and interactive with her peers” and “academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level”. So why should a nurturing mother who has raised such a kid have to defer to some court appointed “guardian ad litem” (whatever the hell that is).
Who is it that loves the kid and is really interested in her happiness? To the mother, this smart, morally upright 10 year old girl represents a successful outcome.
But to some court appointed busy body and and the public education system,this 10 year old represents a problem. Since he knows good from bad and up from down, her views must be “rigid”. If she thinks that the prospect of having eighteen abortions before “finding herself” and becoming an unwed mother at 42 is undesirable, it might lead her to judge the actions of others negatively.
You see, Amanda’s mother is only looking out for Amanda.
But the court and the “guardian ad litem” (whatever the hell that is) have a higher goal, social justice (whatever the hell that is).
So, Amanda’s Christian views must be sifted and challenged in a public school setting, so she and all those other potential human beings are as confused and useless as social workers and public school administrators.
ping
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.