Culture Wars over or about to explode?

If there’s an explosion at all, unfortunately, it’ll probably be limited to the home school community. Frankly, I feel the average American Christian has compromised his faith to American “culture” to the point where he no longer values the Biblical / Reformation roots of our freedom and doesn’t have the discernment to recognize that for decades now the government schools have been been advancing the claim that THEY, and not the parents, hold the ultimate authority in what kids “know, can do, are what they will BE like” (to use some language from educational reform people).

Those home school families have not bowed their knees to Baal, Mammon and Jezebel to the degree that most American Christians have. They are like the Irish monks who kept Western civilization and Christianity alive during the Dark Ages. I honestly don’t think that most Christians today have the discernment to recognize their value or have the guts to stand with them as the agenda people use the power of the State to wipe them out.

By the way, if you’re smart enough to appreciate the implications of what’s going on in California with “who owns the kids,” there’s something even worse on the horizon called the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. This horrible treaty has been floating around for years without the US ratifying it, and every once in a while it surfaces again. The Convention is an international treaty that creates specific civil, economic, social, cultural and even economic rights for every child. It is monitored by the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child, which conceivably has enforcement powers. The HSLDA people have blowing the whistle on this obscene, global power grab for years. Since ratified treaties supercede the Constitution and American laws, if ratified, American children would now have their “rights” guaranteed by a UN structure, not American law! And, we all know what evil activist lawyers and child’s rights groups will do in defining “rights” and attacking Christian parents who try to set Biblical standards for their children in their homes.

This treaty is especially ominous once you realize that Hillary Clinton is a child’s rights activist, and would love to see this thing ratified and enforced.

Quite frankly, Manxmann, the UN scares me about as much as it scared Saddam Hussein. They can pass all the treaies they want, but they can’t enforce them. Everyone but rightwing wack jobs know that. Though I applaud the united states for not signing anything of the sort.
As far as Home schoolers go. Listen there are good and bad in that bunch like everywhere else. So get off the high horse. Plenty of good decent Christians who are quite capable of discernment send their kids to public schools. They do not bow their knee to Baal by doing so. I’ve seen a few homeschool situations that could be best described as nothing more than the blind leading the blind. Then I have seen some shining examples also.

Manxman, you are right on the money, and the fundamental issue isn’t homeschooling as much as it is whether parents have a fundamental constitutional right to direct the upbringing of the children God has blessed them with. The website http://www.parentalrights.org has a lot of information on the issue of parental rights and the UN treaty issue. There has most definitely been a recent accelerating shift toward the concept that the state has the right to make sure that we raise “good citizens” who understand and appreciate the state’s values on “diversity”, the origin of man, global warming, social justice, etc. and we in the Christian community are like frogs in the pot, closing our eyes to what is coming and to what has already come to pass.

Bror Erickson,

When we see the Christian Church in America as a whole exercise the same discernment and make the sacrifices that most home schooling families make, then things would change in America. The sad truth of the matter is that most Christian families with kids in public schools haven’t got a clue about what the schools are doing to their kids and how that is impacting their faith and their lives. They just aren’t doing their homework. The consequences are becoming obvious.

The over-all quality of home schooling may have slipped over the years. Back in the ’80’s when we started it, you were literally at the mercy of the local superintendent, and homeschooling was definitely a more of a matter of religious conviction than it is today. It has become something of a fad and a status symbol, and there are a number of people who do it for shaky reasons.

Again, Manxman, we have seen the same thing over the years since we began in 1991. Part of the reason for that is because the homeschooling movement has become so much larger and more mainstreamed as an educational alternative. One good thing that may come out of this recent issue in CA is it will push our people to their knees and purge those out of homeschooling who are not really committed to it.

Bror, I hope you’re right about the UN, but I fear you’re not. New treaties do appear to give them the power & authority to work their will on the unwilling, and hence past experience does not guarantee future results.

Thanks and kudos to Manxman, Don S and Bike Bubba for informative and concise assessments as regards content of programs in the US “public” school system and the United Nation’s attempted usurpations of the parental authority.

God has given children to parents, not governmental agencies, domestic or international. Children do not belong to the state.

“Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it.”

“Feed my lambs….”

So says the Scriptural imperative with a promise.

Lutherans have long known and understood the imperative.

Confessional Lutherans maintain an extensive primary, secondary and higher educational system at great personal sacrafice and cost.
Other Christian traditions have begun to build Christian primary schools to meet the demand of discerning parents who are aware of the serious need.

There is a “religion” in the public school system………and it is not ours.

Aside to Bror Erickson:

What, pray tell, in your opinion is a “right wing whack job”?

That would be an ad hominem attack, a denigrating remark, no?

Someone who rejects the United Nations as a viable world “peace” agency/ organization?

German homeschoolers are currently experiencing intense persecution. Look at the role of the court system in this matter from an article I found in Wikipedia –

Homeschooling is illegal in Germany with rare exceptions. The requirement to attend school has been upheld, on challenge from parents, by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany. Parents violating the law have most prominently included devout Christians who want to give their children a more Christain education than what’s offered by the schools. Penalties against these parents have included fines (around €5,000), successful legal actions to take away the parents’ custody of their children, and jail time for the parents.[1]

In a landmark legal case commenced in 2003 at the European Court of Human Rights a homeschooling parent couple argued on behalf of their children that Germany’s compulsory school attendance endangered their children’s religious upbringing, promoted teaching inconsistent with their Christian faith — especially the German State’s mandates relating to sex education in the schools — and contravened the declaration in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union that “the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions”. In September 2006 the European Court of Human Rights upheld the German ban on homeschooling, stating “parents may not refuse …[compulsory schooling] on the basis of their convictions”, and adding that the right to education “calls for regulation by the State”. The European Court took the position that the plaintiffs were the children, not their parents, and declared “children are unable to foresee the consequences of their parents’ decision for home education because of their young age…. Schools represent society, and it is in the children’s interest to become part of that society. The parents’ right to educate does not go as far as to deprive their children of that experience.” The European Court endorsed a “carefully reasoned” decision of the German court concerning “the general interest of society to avoid the emergence of parallel societies based on separate philosophical convictions and the importance of integrating minorities into society.”

#10 Maxnman

I would like to se conservatives like yourself step back from the immediate issue here , take a deep breath, and consider for us where exactly is the principled line between society and parents as to what and how much authority parents have over children. I ask this from the perspective of the last 2000 years.

In ancient rome and greece fathers had power of the sword (life and death) over their entire family. They could choose infanticide for their unwanted girl children. Incest was rather common or sex with young slaves. abortions were also rather common.

Notably St Paul does not address any of these deep social ills of his time.

at what point must the government supercede parental control, and what would be the guiding principle for that, that could be applied in every situation?

What part of that principle would be a moral imperative and what part would be simple logic?

thanks!

Another Kerner,
anyone who would use the bloated, useless, and preoccupied U.N. to divert attention from the issue at hand. Seriously the U.N. Is not relevant. France knows it, Russia knows it. North Korea knows it. Iran Knows it. The only people that don’t seem to be on the far right, and the far left of this country. But when was the last time you saw the U.N accomplish anything?

Bror Erickson

The only reason the UN remains impotent is because the US (and a very few other countries) refuse to give them the power to do more. The vast majority of the member states have repeatedly voted to give the UN the power to tax, regulate personal firearms, regulate labor practices, regulate environmental standards, etc. The only reason these things have not come into effect is because American and English right-wing nut jobs continue to pay attention to the latest UN draft legislation and proposed treaties and make a huge stink about them.

And while, the UN itself can not enforce treaties, once the US ratifies them any US attorneys office or even your locale county prosecutor can. They become the supreme law of the land. The UN is largely useless but it will not remain that way if we don’t continue to make a stink about all of the ways the member states try to empower the UN.

Bror, Joe has it exactly right. The UN is powerless if the country does not accord it authority. Your example of Saddam Hussein is perfect for that. The UN could do nothing because Saddam did not care one bit what the UN thought or said.

However, as you should know, international treaties, if approved by the Senate by a 2/3 vote (advise and consent function) and ratified by the President, become the law of the land, equal to U.S. federal statutory law (meaning it overrides state and local laws) and subservient only to the U.S. Constitution. The treaty on the Rights of the Child that Manxman referenced has been supported for ratification by Hillary Clinton (I don’t know about Obama, but I suspect he would be supportive as well). There is a very real risk that the U.S. will ratify this treaty in the next few years. If it does, the UN will not be the agency supporting this oppressive law. It will be U.S. FEDERAL COURTS!

BTW, what do you mean when you reference the “far right”? Are you talking about folks that simply want the freedom to practice their faith and raise their children in the way God directs them — freedoms we have enjoyed since the founding? If so, sign me up for the “far right”, and I believe Dr. Veith might fall in that camp as well (though I wouldn’t presume to speak for him).

In the linked column, E.J. Dionne Jr. notes: “If you were looking for a presidential election that revolved around religion… You’d go back to 1928. Now there was a culture war.

That’s probably true, especially for Lutherans, if one were to look at the writings of Martin Sommer and Paul F. Bente and others in The Lutheran Witness and various Lutheran publications opposing the idea of a papist president. I remember reading similar warnings in Lutheran literature from 1960 when Judith Exner’s boyfriend was running for president.

BTW, information on Lutheran opposition to Al Smith and the surprising voting results in predominantly Lutheran upper-midwestern counties are presented in “Al Smith and the Republican Party at Prayer: The Lutheran Vote. 1928” (Douglas C. Stange, The Review of Politics, Vol. 32, No. 3., Jul., 1970, pp. 347-364).

Carl, just wondering, but is referring to JFK as “Judith Exner’s boyfriend” (@15) really putting the best construction on things?

fw (I am assuming you are Frank Sonnek)

I think your post has ulterior motives that go beyond where to draw the line between parental and state authority in the upbringing of children.

I think it is safe to say that Christian parents who claim to believe that the Bible is “true,” realize that they are required to try to raise their children to know, love and serve the God of the Bible. This is a command – it is not optional. We are to “stack the deck,” so to speak, in favor of God’s truth in their education and upbringing. Some kids will accept what we as parents try to do – some will reject Christ. But, we are still required to do the best we can to raise our kids in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

You, as a homosexual with no children, have not felt the weight of this responsibility, nor have you experienced the conflict, opposition and the frustration that occur in trying to raise a child in this corrupt culture we live in today where there are forces like public education that are opposed, often deliberately, to your attempts to pass on your Biblical faith and moral values to your children. St. Paul has a lot to say about how children are to be raised and what families are to look like. Although he had no kids of his own, he viewed the churches he founded as his children, and he was super-zealous in his desire to protect them from wolves who would attack his flock. He burned with anger against those who sought to undermine his efforts. Paul would understand EXACTLY the actions Christian home schoolers are taking against State attacks on Christian kids.

I think I would be correct in saying that many homosexuals, even Christian homosexuals, see the public schools as an ally in thwarting the efforts of parents like me who want to teach my children that homosexuality is a not “normal” and that homosexual sin and behavior is a serious matter in God’s eyes, both in the life of the person involved and in the society that person lives in. It makes your life easier if society does not take a negative view of homosexuality and treats homosexual behavior as a legitimate option. So, you naturally want to see the State undermine the efforts of people like me in this area. One of the reasons many of us have turned to home schooling is that we recognized deliberate attempts by agenda groups working in public education to try to alter the Biblically-based moral values and world view of our children, especially in the area of their sexuality.

Manxmann,
I think it incumbent on Christian Parents to raise their Children to be in the world but not of the world. I do not have anything against homeschooling perse. I think it is hypocritical of a state especially one like California to be talking about a child’s right to an education, legal or otherwise. I’ve seen parents do a wonderful job of homeschooling, and I’ve seen some bad examples of it.
I don’t think Frank had any sort of agenda. He poses a very good question. To what extent does the state also have responsibility to these Children. I’m sure you agree the state does have some responsibility. At what point is it child abuse, that parents under the auspices of home schooling, are denying their children an education?
I agree that public schools take their PC agenda a bit too far. I think if you would not presume to know Frank you would find him agreeing with that statement. But you don’t teach your kids to be in the world and not of it by sheltering them from the world.

Manxman (@18), just to second Bror (@19), I found it odd that you would tell Frank that he, in so many words, doesn’t get it because he has no children. And then you go on to talk about Paul and how he got it, in spite of his having no children.

Rather than telling Frank what his motives are, why not ask him?

Bror Erickson

Frank & I have exchanged e-mails offline on the issue of what public schools are inflicting on kids, and what I posted here is also a result of his responses to some things I sent him that I found particularly outrageous. Even though he now lives in Brazil, I have little doubt that he sees the American public schools as an appropriate change agent & ally in establishing tolerance/acceptance of homosexuality in our pluralistic society by adjusting kids’ values.

I agree with you that parents have to teach their kids to be able to be “in” the world. I don’t believe in running from the world, but engaging it. However, when it comes to my kids, I want it to be at least something of a fair fight. As any parent should know, when it comes to exposing kids to various ideas and values, the age and maturity of the child, who does the teaching and the context of how the ideas are presented are crucial. The public schools often fail in all three of these areas. These factors are often deliberately overlooked in the schools and they run roughshod over other peoples’ children to accomplish their objectives. For example, the people pushing the homosexual agenda are now indoctrinating kids early in elementary school, exposing them to ideas about accepting abnormal sexuality before they are even ready to understand the things involved with normal sexuality. Talk about child abuse!! This goes way beyond political correctness. I think it is criminal for a Christian parent to just throw a their child into that kind of environment before he is mature enough or grounded enough intellectually in what is “right” to be able to withstand what he’ll be subjected to.

We home-schooled our kids until the end of the 8th grade and then enrolled them in public schools. Looking back, I’m not sure this was long enough.

You ask about how I’d determine “child abuse” by parents in denying their kids education, but I think most of the abuse these days lies on the side of the educators in the public schools as they cause Jesus’ little ones to sin and destroy their lives by the ideas and values they promote. Education today attacks the whole kid, and as a parent I don’t want these people deciding for me what being properly educated consists of.

Homeschooling can be fairly regulated. In Ohio where I live, homeschoolers worked with the legislature to establish what I felt were reasonable guidelines. These included such things as notifying the district of your intent to home school, providing them an overview of the materials you intended to use in educating your kids, conduting yearly evaluations using such things as standardized test (which is more than the kids in the schools have to do), etc. As part of our program, we used many materials from Christian text book publishers and other materials that were overtly Biblical and Christian, and we informed the district that we were using these materials, and they were OK’ed.

tODD,

Like the Centurion who “got it” where Jesus’ authority was concerned because he himself had and exercised authority, Paul “got it” about parenting because his “responsibilities” as a pastor and shepherd are of the same nature of those of a parent. The buck for the well-being of his spiritual children in his churches stopped with him. You’ll notice he even reminded people of his spiritual fatherhood in their lives. Frank just doesn’t experience this level of Biblically-mandated responsibility. Paul did.

Manxmann,
“I think it is criminal for a Christian parent to just throw a their child into that kind of environment before he is mature enough or grounded enough intellectually in what is “right” to be able to withstand what he’ll be subjected to.”
You see here is my problem with you Manxmann. It is not criminal to send your kid’s to public school. It is precisely the exposure to this that teaches them to be in the world but not of it. And I personally don’t think there is anything wrong with teaching kids to be tolerant of Homosexuals. I would much rather have that than teaching them to tie homosexuals to barbedwire fences in below freezing temperatures, or teaching them to go protest a church, with such hateful signs as “God hates faggots.” And some issues of sex are probably better dealt with before hand rather than after the event.
(by the way I do have a Son, and the question of school is ever on my mind. I want him to have the best education he can get. I don’t know that the California public Schools can do that for him. I’m not so worried he will be exposed to such and such. Being exposed to the world is part of living in the world.)
But this is all an aside Manxmann. I agree that the public school system has been a failure in many ways. In some cases students are much better off not going at all. But the state does have a responsibility to its citizens, even the ones that can’t vote. At some point the state is required to step in. I think California if nothing else is going to have to revisit this issue. I think if they adopted something along the lines of what Ohio has there probably would not be this issue.

#23

Bror Erickson……

Agreed that the State has a responsibility to the citizens of a country both young, old, born and unborn.

Which and What responsibilities in this country are laid out in the United States Constitution.

The Scripture is clear as regards who is responsible for the education of children and to whom the children belong.

Surely you recognize the simple principles laid out in Holy Writ relative to children.

I remain surprised that you have not been supportive (in this exchange) of the primary and secondary schools which both WELS and LC-MS maintain for the education of Christian children, both Lutheran and not.

I am fairly certain that individuals who have commented here disagreeing with some of your suppositionsare are not attempting to hide their children from “the world”, but are instead establishing for them the Christian foundation so necessary in the current culture: they are simply fulfilling the Godly imperative to arm their children with the spiritual guidance and education in a post modern society.

Surely you don’t believe that home schoolers are retreating towards “monkism”.

Using “Marilyn Monroe’s boyfriend” might have besmirched her reputation.

There’s a world of difference between “monkism” and parents protecting children from influences that can harm them. Some argue with some validity that protecting them from all bad influences stunts their growth as a person and a Christian. This sort of extreme is just that though – the extreme fringes.

Parents who homeschool for religious reasons seem to want their children to have a firm foundation before facing the challenges that can destroy and harm. They don’t want their child to never face challenges, but rather that they be ready for the challenges when they do face them. Obviously, no parent will do it perfectly – there are those who go overboard in protecting, just as there are those who go overboard in exposing.

However, regardless of how well I personally think they are accomplishing that balancing act, I’m sure as hell going to defend the right of parents to do the decision making in the matter. There’s no one else who’s going to do the job as well as the children’s parents when deciding how to raise and train the kids. Teachers and government laws certainly don’t.

Another Kerner,
I suppose I haven’t dleved into the area of Private/Parochial schools, because that isn’t the topic. I am very supportive of them actually. Sit on the board of directors for one of our highschools.
I am not accusing all homeschoolers of monkism, or retratism. I am accusing Manxmann of this. As far as I can tell from what he writes he is guilty of it. Not all homeschoolers.
As far as Holy Writ goes, you as well as I know that argument is not going to stand in court. You as well as I also know that parents don’t have to homeschool their kids in order to be in compliance with what Holy Scripture teaches on the matter. And I take particular offence to Manxmann claiming that parents who put their kids in public schools are somehow less than Christian.

Bror,

I suppose you are engaging in a little fun devil’s advocacy with some of your more outrageous comments above (eg tying homosexuals to barbed wire fences — you had to reach back 10 years for that horrible example, and there is some dispute as to whether the crime was motivated by homosexual hatred or a bad drug deal to boot). I am sure that you are not accusing typical Christian home schoolers of teaching their children to hate the sinner, rather than the sin. As you know, it is the liberal secular left that conflates the two and feigns not to understand Christian doctrine regarding sin and that God loves the sinner despite his/her hateful sin. Christians should be tolerant of homosexuals and all other sinners, but never ever tolerant of sin.

That aside, you need to investigate Patrick Henry College (PHC) and National Christian Forensics & Communications Association (NCFCA), so that you can speak to this issue less ignorantly. As Manxman has so eloquently stated, the vast majority of Christian homeschoolers homeschool in order to provide their God-given children with a foundation in Biblical truth which is impossible to do if you send them to a secular public school. Yes, we do shelter our children until they’ve been firmly rooted, but the ultimate goal is to equip them not just to be in the world, but to INFLUENCE the world. We understand that if ungodly educators with a liberal agenda have our children for 6-8 hours per day, five days per week, and we only get them for their remaining 6-8 waking hours, which includes sports, eating, dressing, bathing, other activities, and homework, their primary influence is going to come from the godless educators and not from us. What children need more than anything else is the investment of time for discipleship, and we don’t believe we can invest adequate time in our children if we send them to school. It’s as simple as that.

Back to PHC and NCFCA. NCFCA is a national organization having some 5000 12-18 year old debaters and speakers, with annual competitions designed to train up our children in their public speaking and communication skills. It involves a sacrificial investment of time and money on the part of single income home schooling families, and the competition level is amazing!

PHC started a mere 8 years ago and is comprised of a student body which is 85% homeschooled. It is operating at an Ivy League level already, and its debate and moot court teams routinely take first in national competitions. Two or three years ago, as a 4 year old upstart college with fewer than 300 students, its moot court team defeated Oxford’s team debating British law in England! That dominance has since continued.

You owe it to your son to investigate this issue thoroughly before you commit to public school.

Carl (@25), sigh. It seems you’re only interested in making the best construction of things when it applies to those whose politics you agree with. Pity.

Don S,
First off, your getting to know me a little bit. Sometimes I do like to play devils advocate, I admit it. And on this issue, I’ll argue both sides. You say I have to reach back, no I don’t. It may have been ten years ago but it is still fresh on my mind. And there still are so called Christian parading around the country selling their bigotry, and I bet a few of them home school. and by saying that I am in no way accusing all home schoolers of being bigots. But I will go after Manxman on the issue when he says bigoted things.
But then you write:”Christian homeschoolers homeschool in order to provide their God-given children with a foundation in Biblical truth which is impossible to do if you send them to a secular public school.” And this is just not true, for I know many people who do send their kids to public schools, and do instill in their kids Christian values, and a Christian worldview. It is quite possible for the Holy Spirit to work through the word of God in one hour on Sunday.
Now I know there are plenty of great homeschooled students out there, and I applaud Patrick Henry College.
I don’t like the California Public School system, but I don’t think it is proper for people to run around accusing Christians of negligence because they send their kids to public schools. Nor do I think it is proper for Christian parents who cannot teach, as opposed to those who can, to take their kids out of school so as to sheild them from the world, yet deprive them of any education.

Bror, as I look back on Manxman’s posts, I don’t see what he wrote that is bigoted. He in no way directed his comments at homosexuals, but rather at homosexuality, and the promotion of homosexuality and other sins by public schools. That was my point — you can’t conflate the two. We must teach against homosexuality because it is wrong — it is sin. We should not teach against or teach hate against homosexuals because they are the created and loved by God just as we are. He did make some generalizations about what homosexuals and particularly Christian homosexuals would like to see the public schools promote. I suspect for the vast majority of them, he is correct. You made some generalizations about what Christian homeschoolers teach their children about homosexuals. I KNOW that you are 99.9999% wrong. Your comments are far more bigoted than his.

Don S,
I don’t think I have said one thing that would be a blanket statement for all homeschoolers. I have only pointed towards some tendencies seen in some. I have also combatted statements made against Christians who in their freedom send their kids to public schools without sin. You and Manxman are the ones here who are saying it is impossible to raise Christian children whilst sending them to public schools. And that is false.
And if prior to this I have had conversations with manxman that have colored my opinion of him, and what he says, then I suppose I should be allowed that as much as he is allowed to make generalizations about frank in public, because of conversations he has had with him in private. Again I have made no generalizations of all homeschoolers. (Or atleast I have not meant too.)

OK Bror, thank you for conceding that not all homeschoolers wish to teach their children to kill homosexuals. I have never met a homeschooling family that had any desire to instill anything but love in their children, though there probably is one somewhere.

Again, the Matthew Shepard incident was criminal, but it was 10 years ago, and Christians were not involved. As 20/20 reported about three years ago, the motive may well have been drugs, not gay-hatred anyway. I am mystified as to why you brought it up in the context of a homeschooling discussion. Have you really been acquainted with homeschooling families you would consider to be murderous?

Since you dropped the UN argument, I assume you understand now how the UN could be a threat to us with respect to the Rights of the Child treaty.

You misunderstood my statement, probably because I didn’t express it well. I disagree with Manxman to the extent that I don’t believe it is criminal for Christian parents to put their kids in public school. In fact, I think for some it is the right choice. Home schooling is a huge commitment, and many are not cut out for it. They are not prepared for the sacrifices involved. For others, a private traditional school is the right choice. Each family needs to go before the Lord and seek His face on this very important issue. However, there is no question that the public schools are not the same now as they were even 10-20 years ago. In California, at least, they are extremely ideological. Every year legislation is signed which mandates additional anti-Christian curricula to be required to be taught to all students. This year, it is now required that the public school curriculum affirmatively promote homosexual and transgendered lifestyles as being equally valid alternative lifestyles to those of traditional monogamous families. I realize that is not the case in Utah, but even so, teachers unions have a chokehold on public education there, and the unions are the ones pushing these “post Christian” or “tolerant” curricula. Any Christian parent has to seriously consider whether it is right to subject your child to such Satanic propaganda on a daily basis.

This was my statement: “the vast majority of Christian homeschoolers homeschool in order to provide their God-given children with a foundation in Biblical truth which is impossible to do if you send them to a secular public school”. I can see how you read that as “it is impossible to provide your child with a foundation in Biblical truth if you send him to public school”. However, that is not what I meant. What I meant was: “if you homeschool, you have the opportunity to provide your child with a foundation in Biblical truth, the depth of which is impossible to provide if you place him in public school”. This statement is different in two very important ways. First, it correctly acknowledges that many parents do a fine job of instilling a foundation of Biblical truth in their public-schooled children. Second, it recognizes that homeschooling gives one the opportunity to do even a better job, because you have SO MUCH MORE TIME, as I discussed in an earlier post. However, it is only an opportunity. You still have to do the hard work of discipleship to realize the potential homeschooling affords.

I wish you and your wife the best as you consider what God has in store for you in directing the education of your precious son.

Don S,
I don’t know where you have been for the last year or so that I have been on this blog. At best my ex and I get to determine where my son goes. But I have a feeling I’ll pretty much be ignored, and the courts won’t say one way or another.
Why did I bring up the Matthew Shephard instance? Because manxman brought up the homosexual issue in the first place. In the context of what he was saying it seemed as if he thought the reason you go to homeschool is to protect your children from being taught to tolerate homosexuals. The matthew Shephard instances was a prime example of where this leads, not because Christians did it, but because people claiming to be Christian supported it with a “God hates Faggots” campaign.
As far as the U.N. no I still think they are a bloated and incompetent mass of “do gooders” who can’t pose any serious threat to any country’s sovereignty. I would still object to our politicians trying to use them to pass laws through a back door, but then that is ultimately what we have the supreme court for, as I understand it.
Thank you for reconsidering your position on Parents sending their kids to public schools. California public schools were a night mare when I went. They were still ideologues. And I do hate teacher unions, with a passion. Beleive me. But I still think it is quite possible for Children to be brought up Christian, and even be incredibly strong Christians whilst going to Public Schools. As Luther used to say what makes a theologian (and we are all more or less theologians) is meditatio (study) Oratio (prayer) and Tentatio (torture of the soul) I do dare say students in public schools get much more of the third, than homeschooled students protected from outside influences.

Bror,

I’m sorry to hear that. I didn’t know, as I didn’t used to engage the comments as much as I have recently.

I can’t speak for Manxman, but I think he only brought up the homosexuality issue because he was responding to Frank Sonnek, for whom that issue is a major concern. Let me say this — in my experience, the people who do the best in homeschooling are those who do it because they want to have the maximum opportunity to disciple and instill their values in their children, rather than those who do it because they want to run away from something in the public schools. In other words, it should be a positive alternative, rather than an alternative taken to avoid a negative.

I agree with you that the UN itself is stupid, useless and bloated. I don’t fear anything it can do, but I do fear the push by liberal internationalists in our country to ratify UN-initiated treaties. Once they are our law, there will be plenty of liberal activist America-hating groups here who will ensure that they are enforced in our courts. I sense that you and I probably agree on that issue.

I didn’t reconsider my position on public schools. Rather, I originally misstated my position, because of unclear writing. Public schools are a godly alternative for some Christian families, if they do not feel the call to home school, and sometimes, as perhaps in your case, they are the only alternative. God will work in all circumstances, obviously. And Luther was right about torture of the soul. It is an important process for all of us to go through in our spiritual development. I don’t advocate sheltering my children all of their lives, for this reason. My 21 year old son and 18 year old daughter, both in college, are fully engaged with the world at this point in their lives, and are both growing mightily in their faith. They are both leaders and influencers in their respective college communities. Most homeschoolers simply believe that it is better for their children to be grounded in their faith first, that’s all. To be clear, we have very good friends who public-schooled their children all the way through their education. Those children are now in their 30’s and all are in full-time Christian service and are the most godly and faithful people you would ever want to meet.

I will pray for you, your son, and your ex, particularly that you and your ex would be restored to a cooperative, amiable relationship with respect to your son, and that you would be afforded the opportunity to strongly influence his upbringing.