SIXTH COLUMN

"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address: 6thColumn@6thcolumnagainstjihad.com.

Saturday, May 27, 2006

U.N. Making Homeschooling Illegal?


Homeschoolers listen up: "Threat seen from U.S. judges who bow to child-rights treaty.

A U.N. treaty conferring rights to children could make homeschooling illegal in the U.S. even though the Senate has not ratified it, a homeschooling association warns.

Michael Farris, chairman and general counsel of the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, or HSLDA, believes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child could be binding on U.S. citizens because of activist judges, reports LifeSite News.

Farris said that according to a new interpretation of "customary international law," some U.S. judges have ruled the convention applies to American parents.

"In the 2002 case of Beharry v. Reno, one federal court said that even though the convention was never ratified, it still has an impact on American law," Farris explained, according to LifeSiteNews. "The fact that virtually every other nation in the world has adopted it has made it part of customary international law, and it means that it should be considered part of American jurisprudence."

The convention places severe limitations on a parent's right to direct and train their children, Farris contends.
The HSLDA produced a report in 1993 showing that under Article 13, parents could be subject to prosecution for any attempt to prevent their children from interacting with material they deem unacceptable.

Under Article 14, children are guaranteed "freedom of thought, conscience and religion," which suggests they have a legal right to object to all religious training. Further, under Article 15, the child has a right to "freedom of association."
"If this measure were to be taken seriously, parents could be prevented from forbidding their child to associate with people deemed to be objectionable companions," the HSLDA report explained.

Farris pointed out that in 1995 the United Kingdom was deemed out of compliance with the convention "because it allowed parents to remove their children from public school sex-education classes without consulting the child."

Farris argues, according to LifeSiteNews, that "by the same reasoning, parents would be denied the ability to homeschool their children unless the government first talked with their children and the government decided what was best. This committee would even have the right to determine what religious teaching, if any, served the child's best interest."
Offering solutions, Farris suggests Congress use its power to define customary law and modify the jurisdiction of federal courts.

"Congress needs to address this issue of judicial tyranny by enacting legislation that limits the definition of customary international law to include only provisions of treaties that Congress has ratified," he said.

Farris also suggested Congress could pass a constitutional amendment stating explicitly that no provision of any international agreement can supersede the constitutional rights of an American citizen.

He pointed out two such amendments have been proposed in Congress.

Finally, he says specific threats to parental rights can be solved by "putting a clear parents' rights amendment into the black and white text of the United States Constitution."


Remember that a goal of contemporary education is to create "world citizens" in the image mandated by social engineering. The education of children outside their influence and mandates is anathema.

7 Comments:

  • At Sat May 27, 04:46:00 PM PDT, Blogger Cubed © said…

    I have always held that homeschooling is the only way we can do an end-run around the totalitarians and their fellow-travellers.

    It looks as if "they" understand that. Our schools have been used as the primary means of raising a population compliant and submissive to government ever since Martin Luther established the first tax-supported, compulsory attendance, compelled curriculum system in Europe in 1527 (he had died by then, but his request to the leaders of the German states was honored).

    Can you imagine our parents taking their children into secret rooms where no light could be seen from the outside, and trying to counter the conditioning of an entity like the U.N?

    I feel just like Chicken Little. The sky is falling.

     
  • At Sat May 27, 05:04:00 PM PDT, Blogger Cubed © said…

    I'm back - I meant to comment on this: "Finally, he says specific threats to parental rights can be solved by "putting a clear parents' rights amendment into the black and white text of the United States Constitution."

    I gotta say, I'm not confident that this would do any good, since the Supreme Court is also bowing to the UN, and the Constitution is being shredded at an increasingly rapid pace; thing of the First, Second, and Fifth Amendments.

    And how many people do you know who have any idea whatsoever about what the Ninth Amendment has to say?

    If you don't, you're like most people, including candidates for the bench.

    We gotta do something, and maybe the introduction of another Amendment might at least draw attention to the fact that our country is going down the globalist tubes.

     
  • At Sun May 28, 01:10:00 AM PDT, Blogger Elmer's Brother said…

    I agree Cubed something must be done. HSLDA is a great organization. We retain a lawyer through them as do a lot of homeschoolers. If this were to happen it would be over my dead body.

     
  • At Sun May 28, 07:23:00 PM PDT, Blogger Cubed © said…

    I can hardly imagine an angrier group of people than parents whose children are forceably removed from their homes to be indoctrinated with a philosophy with which they disagree so strongly that they have undertaken the substantial responsibility of teaching them themselves.

    By a foreign entity, no less! By a foreign entity which is opposed to the principles upon which our nation was founded, no less! By a bunch of postmodernists, terrorists, Marxists, Fascists, Communists no less!

    Can you imagine?

    Now, where did I put that pitchfork and torch?

     
  • At Wed May 31, 07:59:00 PM PDT, Blogger jpe said…

    Honestly, it'd probably be for the best if you folks weren't allowed to teach.

    In the future: try researching before going off half-cocked on something so blatantly false as the above article.

    I know, the Kool-Aid sure looks good, but try to keep away from it.

     
  • At Thu Jun 01, 08:55:00 AM PDT, Blogger Cubed © said…

    Jpe,

    Thank you for your interest.

    I made the statement "Our schools have been used as the primary means of raising a population compliant and submissive to government."

    Here's why:

    In the early to mid-1800s, our government school system was established largely under the influence of Massachussetts native Horace Mann, following the model of the early colonial Massachussetts Bay Colony municipalities. Their express purpose was to create a population where there would be no variation of ideas, where everyone believed in the same (Puritan) belief system. With this, they hoped to create social stability.

    Due to a mean-spirited remark made by the family preacher on the occasion of the drowning death of Mann's brother, Horace became a Unitarian, a tolerant religion partly founded by English chemist Joseph Priestley. This notwithstanding, Horace retained many of the dour views of his family's puritanical belief system, including the belief that the sudden influx of large numbers of Catholics would destroy the nation.

    In large part due to his fears, he promoted the establishment of a tax-supported, compulsory attendance, compelled-curriculum school system, which spread rapidly. His chief goal was to salvage the nation by teaching all children, no matter what their parents' beliefs, an orthodox Protestant curriculum.

    Instead of creating the desired "stable" population, it so disturbed the Catholic parents that they created their own school system, which is still in existence today.

    Early in the 1900s, the Utopian Socialists and Progressives of the Rousseauian tradition saw in these captive minds and opportunity to instill their own belief systems in America's children. (I won't bore you here with the details about how we went from the Enlightenment principles of our Founders to the postmodernist collectivist views of the socialists. Suffice it to say it happened during the peri-Civil War period.)

    They were much smarter about it than the Protestants had been, in that they were subtle and disguised their collectivist philosophy as a "make-nice" sort of thing, "just trying to teach good manners and kindness." Now, who could object to that?

    Nobody did, and by the 1950s, "critical mass" in the form of PC, moral equivalency, diversity, etc. had been reached. In the 1960s, their success was rioting in the streets, tearing down the remnants of what had made the US the most attractive destination for people from around the world.

    That process continues with the globalists of the UN and elsewhere; I will soon be publishing a longer piece on that issue. So far, everything I have found supports Eleanor's blog.

    Please do visit again soon.

     
  • At Thu Jun 01, 04:26:00 PM PDT, Blogger Eleanor © said…

    jpe- How do you know that the above article is false? On what do yo base your accusation?

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home