We used to live in Germany. There is a high degree of conformity in that country. No individuality is encouraged at all. I can see why they would try to prevent homeschooling. It does not fit the norm. And, it is now a very godless country. We’re not far behind.

We used to live in England, and you can homeschool there, but it is monitored. There is much more freedom for people to be individuals there than in Germany.

Thank you for that research…precisely why I don’t shy away from saying the things I say about government education being a vehicle for social reform.

All us comfortable Americans sit back in apathy and say “hogwash”…we’re not too far. This stuff happens “slyly” as you said…so slyly that our undereducated masses don’t even get it.

“The ruling expresses concern about the development of parallel communities comprising distinct ethnic groups and immigrants in European countries. To avoid such social fragmentation, the Human Rights Court put the child’s right to an education above parental rights.”

http://folk.uio.no/cbeck/Home%20education%20and%20social%20integration.pdf

So, white Humanist, non-breeding Europeans fear the “social fragmentation” (read: seriously conflicting, numerically competative voting blocks) of their culture (the group), therefore put “the child’s right to an education above parental rights.”

No, not the “child’s right”, the (currently) dominant European group’s right. They switch from talking about the group/society to the child, almost in the same breath. Sly!

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=68846

Education can be seen as methodical socialization of the young generation (Durkheim 1956). Education must assure, among the citizens a sufficient community of ideas and sentiments, without which any society is impossible (Ibid). Sufficient community is for Durkheim solidarity and the meaning of social integration. Social integration includes systems of integration, but also reciprocity of practices and communication between either actors or collectives (Giddens 1988).
Home education is increasing in Norway and other modern countries (Beck 2006). If school attendance is considered important to social integration, non-attendance due to home education can be viewed as a threat to integration…

The ruling expresses concern about the development of parallel communities comprising distinct ethnic groups and immigrants in European countries. To avoid such social fragmentation, the Human Rights Court put the child’s right to an education above parental rights.

http://folk.uio.no/cbeck/Home%20education%20and%20social%20integration.pdf

White Humanist Europeans fear the subcultures rising up from the religious, and ESPECIALLY the immigrant religious, who keep having babies that will outvote them in 18 years or so.

Eurocentric snobbery, Eurocentric Liberalism. (Not all Europeans fit this bill, but it’s majority)

I wonder what the non-religion practicing parents who desire to homeschool in Germany say about that law…………hahahaha. Kinda comical….

Eventually, the childs right to choose makes its debue. The may start exhibiting these characteristics as a teen….or young adult. They question. They wonder. And eventually they take on some sort of ‘owned’ faith. it becomes theirs, all theirs, and they realize that as a conscious older child or adult, this is what *they* want. If it happens to mimic the parents doctrine, so be it. If it doesnt, the child makes his or her choice.

My point is that spiritual education given to a child does not hold the power to not present CHOICE to that child. The day will arrive when the childs lifelong teachings either settle in and find a permanent home, or possibly the child will need to restructure, and go through a process to settle into their owned belief system. I mean, most kids dont believe and resign to every last detail of doctrine their parents subscribe to….somewhere along the line, the child finds their own religion, all their own.

The only time IMO this ddiffers is when the religion is taught and the parents are hypocritical, abusive, or perfection-aholics—-we see this often in adults who were forced into a religion that the very pushers of it, abused.

Jaw-dropping.

“But in our culture, a very strong presumption in favor of the parents’ rights to control their child’s upbringing has developed. It is so strong, that we let them teach the children anything they want, take them anywhere they want, and in effect indoctrinate them in any way they see fit. The parents’ treatment of the child has to reach extremes before we will intervene. If there is outright physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, we legally intervene.

But consider educational child abuse…Every time a parent passes some of that (Lori’s note – religion, superstition) to a child, the child has lost the opportunity to find out the truth, she’s less equipped to deal with the real world as we know it, and her life will be filled with more ignorance, fear, and superstition. And she goes on to propagate those ideas, miring all of us in the past.

When parents impart a religious worldview …they do a grievous harm to that child”

Matt McCormick
Professor, Sacramento, CA

http://atheismblog.blogspot.com/2007/02/is-religious-education-child-abuse.html

I would like to reiterate that rights to not hinge on what a civil body gives, whether it be the constitution or Magna Carta or whatever. Our rights come from God. The constitution is our current legal touchstone, that’s all. Some rights are upheld, some are legally violated. (having or brewing alchohol used to be “unconstitional” remember? Even if you don’t agree with imbibing, it is a God-given right) So, yes, we don’t have a right to a nice house, but we do have a right to privacy within that house (and many other places).

I understand what you were reffering to regarding slavery. But I have been hearing that line “children are not property” more frequently lately, and believe that it is very destructive to family rights. I made the points I made in hopes of drawing others’ attention to the embedded, wrongful, assertion. Whatever the intent, it’s a dangerous catchphrase.

I’m being a stickler here. I can see this. But as we know, a whole country can sell out and ride off into the sunset on unsubstantiated claims and platitudeds: a nice phrase.

I fear the phrase “children are not property” becoming such a widespread catchphrase that it changes laws, and overrides my rights to my own children. To discipline them, educated them, religiously train them, as the Bible mandates.

Let me try to clarify my statements. I completely agree that we have God given rights. And yes, at the founding of our country, our government gave us certain Constitutional rights which I still believe these are privelages. Look at other countries and their lack thereof. However, people have taken these rights and have twisted them to fit what ever their selfish desires require at any given moment.

In reference to my statement that children are not property, that was directly related the comment comparing abortion to slavery.