1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/8385/liberty-restored-or-a-lucky-pull-on-the-legal-slot-machine/

Liberty restored or a lucky pull on the legal slot machine?

August 8, 2008 by

Californians can once again home school their children without fear of the state (well, almost). Is this a victory for Liberty? Or did homeschoolers in CA simply benefit from a lucky pull on the legal slot machine — a pull that this time came up three smiling judges?

Of course, the latter is the case. The next challenge to homeschooling in CA could be the pull that once again comes up two frowns. The legal game in CA is similar to the more sophisticated game in DC — a game where it takes five jokers to be a winner, with Liberty never even a card in the deck.

And to smack the face of anyone believing that the bell of freedom rang again, the court noted that “[i]t is important to recognize that it is not for us to consider, as a matter of policy, whether home schooling should be permitted in California. That job is for the Legislature.” The court has restated the belief that the legislature has an enforcable first claim to our children.

Constitutions no longer protect the individual from the state. They are nothing more than the starting point for the state’s continual abrogation of our ethical rights.

{ 4 comments }

Bruce Koerber August 8, 2008 at 10:18 pm

Conducting children’s classes and training oneself along with friends and neighbors to conduct children’s classes will become a more usual practice and although it will at first be a supplement to other more formal education programs the inadequacy of the State-mandated format will become more and more obvious.

At some point the advancement of a classical liberalism civilization will cause a shift away from the oppressive and obsolescent education system propagated by the State in favor of the enlightening education given to those receiving the close attention of a rich pool of trained educators within each neighborhood.

Such is the nature and possibility of entrepreneurial spirits freed from the yoke of the oppressive ego-driven interventionists.

Miklos Hollender August 9, 2008 at 9:05 am

Wait. Children are human beings. Neither legislature nor parents have inalienable rights over them. What parents have is a temporary, and limited, custodianship.

Jim Fedako August 9, 2008 at 10:09 am

Miklos,

Perhaps it was poorly written.

I used inalienable to imply that the right cannot be ethically or morally withdrawn by the state. Not, as it appears, that parents have full ownership over their children.

Thanks!

David Spellman August 11, 2008 at 1:21 pm

The state wants to assert ownership of all human beings. The sooner they take title of your life, the easier it is to convince you they are right. Hence, the State needs to intervene against parents as soon as possible–at birth or even before being an ideal goal.

The purpose of public education, child protective services, and government provided, regulated or subsidized child care is to establish a superior claim to each child’s life. This is a prelude to future claims for fighting wars, exacting tribute, and requiring service to the State.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: