This is for sure true. If Americans refer to "God-given rights" they usually advert to the following term of their declaration of independence (which is a great document anyway): "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The thing is, that "certain unalienable rights" are not clearly defined. Is the individual right of the kid on unfiltered and free information not as important as the right of the family to take influence? Therefore - is the right on unfiltered and free information not also a "unalienable right"?
Nevertheless to me this is irrelevant anyway. You should not forget that I am no American and the declaration of independence is nothing more to me than a interesting source of good history and philosophy. As a European I have a different understanding of freedom and rights since I was formed in and through a different culture of course. First of all we Europeans usually understand our state as a representation of ourselves. That means that we normally do not have to be protected from it, since most of us trust into our public authorities. Furthermore most contemporary Europeans see the rights of the individual as those that are the most important ones while rights of groups (i.e. the family) are far less important. The "Kindesinteresse" (interest of the kid) is absolutely in the foreground. If the "Kindesinteresse" is congruent with the interests of the family then we have no problem. But if the interests of the family are much different to what we define as the "Kindesinteresse" the state intervenes in the interest of the kid. This is what happens in the moment in Germany. The state saves the children from being manipulated through their parents who restrict their access on free information because of the parental religious beliefs. To give you a example: Not that long ago I had a harsh discussion with a friend of my wife who refused to open her kids the access to books with Darwinist background (the respective book showed the development of elephants). I am unable to understand that -even if someone is a creationist- it should be forbidden to take a look on it and to talk about it. Sooner or later her kids will get into contact with the teachings of Darwin and then they are going to come into real deep doubts if they understand that their mother suppressed some basic and crucial information. It is not funny to wake up in Disneyland. Therefore the right on information is completely unalienable to me. This is something "God-given" to most of us Europeans. Nevertheless information is one thing, the interpretation is something completely different. This is the point where the mother (in this case) is needed. She has not only the right but the duty to get her good belief across to her children but she has no reason to keep the kids completely uninformed. Such is contraproductive and against the basic "Kindesinteresse".
If the schools are teaching sex ed, including birth control, that is completely against Catholic teaching. I am greatly saddened if the Jesuits are cooperating with this.
The thing is that they teach it but they also conciliate the teaching with the Catholic philosophy of marital life. Marriage in Catholicism is a godly institution and a holy sacrament. Therefore sex outside the marriage is simply not allowed. My boys (I have 3 sons) have been taught that but they also know (according to their age) about the biological essentials. This is no antagonism. My kids simply get the full information. They also get the full information about the different theories about the Genesis together with my personal point of view in this question. Where is the problem? What they do with this intellectual basement in their personal lives is their very own decision. The thing is that they will have enough knowledge some day to reach their very own reasonable arbitration.
I wonder how many of the millions of Catholics would like to provide with a proper moral education Germany. If the country at large is okay with sex outside of marriage
The situation in Germany in this respect is not that different to the situation in the US. We have indeed the problem that large parts of our population lack a proper ethic background. The thing is that this was not triggered by schools or education but through female emancipation and the therewith connected decay of traditional family structures. You can believe me that high divorce rates and mothers who do not care for their children are a much bigger problem in our society than sexual education.
If you are willing to make a distinction between Muslims and Christians, why are you obliged to imprison evangelical Christian parents because of Muslims? If they are insignificant, they are no threat.
The thing is that we would generate a precedence. Since we have to treat all of our citizens equal of course we would indeed open the door to madrassas because of a few insignificant people. Of course some evangelical eccentrics are no threat but they would open the way to a strange Muslim parallel society that we can not tolerate. Therefore there will be no homeschooling.
Since we disagree on whether an inviolable principle is involved (the parents' essential right to determine their own children's education, including evangelicals who want to instruct them at home), I see no resolution.
It might be that there is no resolution, but it is indeed interesting to learn about a different opinion that has its intellectual background.
:)
This is for sure true. If Americans refer to "God-given rights" they usually advert to the following term of their declaration of independence (which is a great document anyway): "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The thing is, that "certain unalienable rights" are not clearly defined. Is the individual right of the kid on unfiltered and free information not as important as the right of the family to take influence? Therefore - is the right on unfiltered and free information not also a "unalienable right"?
Nevertheless to me this is irrelevant anyway. You should not forget that I am no American and the declaration of independence is nothing more to me than a interesting source of good history and philosophy. As a European I have a different understanding of freedom and rights since I was formed in and through a different culture of course. First of all we Europeans usually understand our state as a representation of ourselves. That means that we normally do not have to be protected from it, since most of us trust into our public authorities. Furthermore most contemporary Europeans see the rights of the individual as those that are the most important ones while rights of groups (i.e. the family) are far less important. The "Kindesinteresse" (interest of the kid) is absolutely in the foreground. If the "Kindesinteresse" is congruent with the interests of the family then we have no problem. But if the interests of the family are much different to what we define as the "Kindesinteresse" the state intervenes in the interest of the kid. This is what happens in the moment in Germany. The state saves the children from being manipulated through their parents who restrict their access on free information because of the parental religious beliefs. To give you a example: Not that long ago I had a harsh discussion with a friend of my wife who refused to open her kids the access to books with Darwinist background (the respective book showed the development of elephants). I am unable to understand that -even if someone is a creationist- it should be forbidden to take a look on it and to talk about it. Sooner or later her kids will get into contact with the teachings of Darwin and then they are going to come into real deep doubts if they understand that their mother suppressed some basic and crucial information. It is not funny to wake up in Disneyland. Therefore the right on information is completely unalienable to me. This is something "God-given" to most of us Europeans. Nevertheless information is one thing, the interpretation is something completely different. This is the point where the mother (in this case) is needed. She has not only the right but the duty to get her good belief across to her children but she has no reason to keep the kids completely uninformed. Such is contraproductive and against the basic "Kindesinteresse".
If the schools are teaching sex ed, including birth control, that is completely against Catholic teaching. I am greatly saddened if the Jesuits are cooperating with this.
The thing is that they teach it but they also conciliate the teaching with the Catholic philosophy of marital life. Marriage in Catholicism is a godly institution and a holy sacrament. Therefore sex outside the marriage is simply not allowed. My boys (I have 3 sons) have been taught that but they also know (according to their age) about the biological essentials. This is no antagonism. My kids simply get the full information. They also get the full information about the different theories about the Genesis together with my personal point of view in this question. Where is the problem? What they do with this intellectual basement in their personal lives is their very own decision. The thing is that they will have enough knowledge some day to reach their very own reasonable arbitration.
I wonder how many of the millions of Catholics would like to provide with a proper moral education Germany. If the country at large is okay with sex outside of marriage
The situation in Germany in this respect is not that different to the situation in the US. We have indeed the problem that large parts of our population lack a proper ethic background. The thing is that this was not triggered by schools or education but through female emancipation and the therewith connected decay of traditional family structures. You can believe me that high divorce rates and mothers who do not care for their children are a much bigger problem in our society than sexual education.
If you are willing to make a distinction between Muslims and Christians, why are you obliged to imprison evangelical Christian parents because of Muslims? If they are insignificant, they are no threat.
The thing is that we would generate a precedence. Since we have to treat all of our citizens equal of course we would indeed open the door to madrassas because of a few insignificant people. Of course some evangelical eccentrics are no threat but they would open the way to a strange Muslim parallel society that we can not tolerate. Therefore there will be no homeschooling.
Since we disagree on whether an inviolable principle is involved (the parents' essential right to determine their own children's education, including evangelicals who want to instruct them at home), I see no resolution.
It might be that there is no resolution, but it is indeed interesting to learn about a different opinion that has its intellectual background.
:)