First, see here: Homeschooled Girl Ordered to Attend Public School Over Her ‘Rigid’ Faith | The Church of Jesus Christ.
I believe that had the argument been solely based on the father’s desire to see that his daughter was public schooled, then yes, it possibly could have been the duty of the court to intervene – after all, as part of the divorce proceeding, the primary custodian – the mother – had agreed to share decision making capability with the father.
However, that is not the case here. Instead, we see that the decision was based solely on the mother’s religious ‘indoctrination.’ As a matter of fact, the child in question did attend public school for three courses, including Spanish and P.E. OneNewsNow reports that her public school instructors were impressed with her ‘well-rounded’ social skills.
The court order stated:
“…it would be remarkable if a ten-year-old child who spends her school time with her mother and the vast majority of all her other time with her mother would seriously consider adopting any other religious point of view.”
First, why is it necessary for a child to consider adopting any other religious point of view? Is this a requirement for good parenting?
The GAL believed,
“…interests, and particularly her intellectual and emotional development, would be best served by exposure to a public school setting in which she would be challenged to solve problems presented by a group learning situation and…Amanda would be best served by exposure to different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior.”
So, what is the issue here? The issue is squarely the ability of the parent to enforce their worldview upon their child. Should we as parents be forced to share, on equal footing, religious views adherent to our own? Hardly. Should we force the child to have an open mind, rather, to be open to world religions? No – not at all.
The other side of the coin is that the 10 year girl seems quite adamant about her religious views – even to the point of questioning her father’s love for her since he doesn’t share the same views. The sticking point, it seems is not the level of education or the socialization - which in my opinion would open the child up to social problem solving – but her expressed views.
Does the child, and thus the mother, have a problem when the child believes that the father loves her less because he doesn’t share her views? Indeed – but public school will not solve that. What will? And is it in the court’s jurisdiction to solve this problem?
In my opinion, the idea that the child is ‘too religious’ (yes, you can be and yes it is a bad thing) is not enough for the court to step in and change the parental ability to educate the child. Had the court stepped in based on the previous agreement between the father and mother, in which the decision making was to be shared, and now the father wanted the child to attend public school – had the decision been based on that, then while I think it would have been a wrong decision, I believe it would have been valid.
Your thoughts are always welcome.
Below are several court documents:
August 31st, 2009 11:29 am
[...] This post was Twitted by faitheducation [...]
August 31st, 2009 11:35 am
If the girl is being brought up to believe that her father doesn’t love her enough because he doesn’t share her beliefs, then I’d say the mother shouldn’t be allowed sole responsibility for her education anymore, yes.
September 17th, 2009 12:59 pm
What I believe the court has missed here is that any truly held religious belief will be rigid. If you truly believe the Christ spoke the truth when He said, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life, NO ONE comes to the Father BUT BY ME”, then of course you aren’t going to lend equal credence to other faiths! If you are a Christian, you must by necessity believe all other religions are false!
Therefore, when the court criticizes the rigidity of this girl’s beliefs, it is criticizing the fact that she is a Christian. The court believes that all children must be taught secularism, or at least polytheism – that is, believing that there are many ways to God, all of which are equal and deserve equal consideration. No one’s beliefs may be absolute, and therefore no one is permitted to actually believe anything.
Face it; every child is going to be taught a religion, whether it be polytheism or Christianity. The only question is who is going to decide what religion the children will be taught, and I for one believe that is the parent’s responsibility.
“And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.” – Deut. 6:6-7
August 31st, 2009 11:50 am
I guess my main issue is the route that the Court took to make it’s decision, and the reason which they did it. The father should, and by right does, have dual responsibility in deciding education.
September 17th, 2009 1:07 pm
Amen, Richard.