We knew it was only a matter of time until Dr. Phil managed to cast homeschooling in a negative light, in relation to the FLDS sect in West Texas. I'm going from memory here, but basically he asked the county sherriff or some such person why they didn't check in on the compound residents earlier on to make sure everything was okay out there and their education was adequate. The offical responded, correctly, that Texans have a constitutional right to homeschool and they had no legal grounds to investigate that matter. Dr. Phil went on to comment how it was a shame that there was no oversight so that the authorities could have seen these abuses sooner.
So, does anyone else see the logical disconnect there? What does the method of education have to do with sexual abuse? I'm not defending these wackos, but I do believe in the constitutional principle of requiring some evidence to warrant a search of someone's home. It's probably true that public school personnel are trained to look for signs of abuse in their students, but that doesn't mean that the purpose of public education is to check in on parents.
Also much has been made of the fact that the families were polygamous. Well, again not defending these people, but what is so bad about polygamy from the government's perspective? In a world of no fault divorce, gay marriage and parenthood, lowering ages of consent, and single parenthood by choice (artificial insemination of single women and other such stuff)... is polygamy any worse? As Red Cardigan wrote (see "And Sometimes Tea" on the link list), the government has pretty much tied its own hands on matters of faith and morals by refusing to defend traditional definitions of "family". Again, I am absolutely opposed to polygamy, but on what grounds does the state make any sort of sexual moral judgement these days?
Also of note is that several of the teenage girls were pregnant or already mothers. Again I ask, is that such a big deal in a liberal secular world? What's the pregnancy rate among public schooled teens? Maybe most of them use contraception and/or abortion, but I bet nearly as many "normal" teens are sexually active as those living in the FLDS compound.
On a somewhat unrelated note, I can't remember where I read this, but I had to laugh a few months ago at someone's comment on the Republican primaries. It was noted that the only top Republican candidate with just one wife was the Mormon.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
I like your reasoning, as usual.
I have to say I really agree with you. I am in one way for polygamy either but I too was asking the same questions you were. I find it kind of funny that they are all saying but these teenagers are pregnant and underage. Well why aren't they looking into the public school system then? How many underage teenage girls are pregnant in the schools? Not condoning teenage pregnancy but talk about the pot calling the kettle black?
Oh and on the abuse front. Public schools don't catch this either because my hubby and his siblings were very much abused by their dad growing up and no one even cared to ask. So that is not even a safty net anyway. Oh and no my hubby is not abusive. Thankfully he didn't learn this from his dad and is a good hubby and father.
I whole-heartedly agree with you and I'm very troubled about what Dr. Phil said about homeschooling. Basically he said that a negative of homeschooling is that that there is no oversight. I would not be surprised if the NEA wrote in their trash mission statement that one of the purposes of education is to provide oversight for the well-being of the state's children, or some such rubbish. I wish Dr. Phil and Oprah would open their eyes and see all the successful homeschoolers. Of course, if I got my information from the television, I'd have doubts about homeschooling too. Enough already covering families of 20 who dress alike and travel their state playing unheard of instruments. Okay, I may be off topic now. :)
Post a Comment