Judge Jones discusses his opinion in Kitzmiller v. Dover

Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 26 February 2006 | Staff

[wintertime]

Oh, the horror!
Bizarre, isn't it?

I've never understood why some people are so threatened by education. It's very sad for their kids.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Do you think that your favored educational philosophy will always be the norm in the government schools?

Remember any government powerful enough to impose your favored worldview on other people's children it powerful enough to impose their worldview on yours.

The biggest political bully wins the curriculum and policy war, any your favored group may not always be the biggest

Sorry about posting this twice. I forgot to include shuckmaster's name in the post.

[highball]

Do you think that your favored educational philosophy will always be the norm in the government schools?

We're not talking about "favored educational philosophy", we're talking about your bizarre complaint that your child will have to "forced to associate with other children who have been in Biology".

I don't know what you're so afraid of, that you so fear your child coming into contact with knowledge. I don't understand your paranoia.

I want my son to get the best education possible. He's going to need it in this world. I can't comprehend wanting to keep him out of science classes because those classes don't conform to a political ideology.

[wintertime]

We're not talking about "favored educational philosophy", we're talking about your bizarre complaint that your child will have to "forced to associate with other children who have been in Biology".

###############

My children were in college by the ages of 13, 12, and 13. They associated with students in every branch of the sciences and arts.

The Fourteenth amendment protects parents right to direct the upbringing of their children. This means with whom they associate. It is their right, not yours or mine or the voting mob to direct.

Obviously my children were in college at young ages and exposed to a wide variety of thought in the arts and sciences. HOWEVER,,,,I would NEVER force my educational philosophy on other people's children. I would NEVER force anyone to pay for it. And,,,I definitely would never threaten another parent with police, courts, or foster care, or threaten another citizen with the sheriff's auction of their home or business, if they did not subscribe to my educational philosophy.

It seems you have no problem with forcing your educational worldview on other people's children by threat of police action, nor do you seem to have scruples about threatening your neighbor with a sheriff's auction if they refuse to pay for it.

[WildHorseCrash]

I have posted a link to an excellent essay outlining the Supreme Court rulings that emphatically state that it is PARENTS who are to direct a child's education and upbring.

And if the parents are unhappy with the educational opportunities which the state makes available, they can exercise their rights as parents in the education and upbringing of their children to homeschool them or to put them in private school. Constitutionally, nothing more is required.

Government schools are a price-fixed monopoly, that creates a hostile business climate for the formation of private schools. Then government taxes parents to the point that both parents must work, and makes homeschooling impossible for many. It is NOT choice then when the government threatens parents with armed police, court, and foster care action if it does not use its government monopoly schools. Choice? Hardly! It is a monstrosity!

Even so, it is not required constitutionally for the state to do anything more. If you wish to defund the public school system in your state and home town, run for office and see how many people vote for you. I'm sure people in other communities, who are competiting with yours for information-age jobs, will be very supportive of your efforts.

Evolution or ID has profound religious consequences for all the children in the school. If you can not see this then what can I say? Those who will thoughtfully examine this without prejudice with see that how the teaching of the origin of life is approached WILL have religious consequences.

It will have consequences, as will any bit of secular knowledge that goes against someone's religious beliefs. So what? If they don't want to live in the real world, that is their problem. The government need not, and should not, fail to teach secular subjects because it'll hurt someone's religious sensibilities. If extracurricular religious training is insufficient to sooth these egg-shell fragile religious temperaments, then the parents have other options.

So...why are we allowing political bullies ( either ID or evolution) to FORCE children into an environment that WILL undermine cherished family values?

We are requiring that children be given a well-rounded secular education. If someone has some freaky religious objection to that, that is their problem. Take the kid to Sunday school. If that's not enough, teach them at home or send them to a religious school.

This is NOT an issue that is open to the voting MOB to decide. If the government must not be in the business of establishing religious belief, it holds that government must NOT be in the business of FORCING children into an environment that will dis-establish or undermine their religion.

This is where the error in this thinking comes from. It is a false equivocation. Just because teaching something to establish religion is illegal, it does not follow that teaching secular science that happens to threatens someone's religion is also illegal. In fact, it is quite clear that it is most definitely not.

Even if parents do not enroll a child in formal Biology courses in high school, the child is forced to associate with other children who have been in Biology. On the one hand the government has trashed the parents right to direct the association of their children ( remember this is a First Amendment Right) but to rectify the problem the government would have to forbid the biology class children from discussing it ( a violation of free speech).

This is just too silly for words. Afraid of "Biology cooties"??

Government schools are immoral, not only because of evolution or ID, but for HUNDREDS of curriculum and policy issues that establish or "disestablish" or undermine values that have RELIGIOUS, political, and cultural consequences.

It may be immoral, but it's not illegal. (*And it's not really immoral, either. In fact, indoctrinating your kids into believing that Genesis is real is, in my mind, immoral, and should be actionable child-abuse.)

[wintertime]

And if the parents are unhappy with the educational opportunities which the state makes available, they can exercise their rights as parents in the education and upbringing of their children to homeschool them or to put them in private school. Constitutionally, nothing more is required.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&77

Government runs a price-fixed monopoly that creates a very hostile business environment for the creation of private schools.

Government also imposes onerous taxes that make it impossible for parents to pay for private school, even if they could exist in competition with price-fixed monopoly schools.

Government taxes force both parents into the workforce, making homeschool impossible.

Then when homeschooling and private schooling is impossible, the government then grants a "choice": Attend the government assigned indoctrination camp or go to prison and have your children placed in foster care. Geeze! Some "choice"!

[wintertime]

Even so, it is not required constitutionally for the state to do anything more. If you wish to defund the public school system in your state and home town, run for office and see how many people vote for you.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&7

Political action does seem to be working. Regarding Milwaukee, a bill raising the cap on vouchers from 15,000 to 22,000 has just passed both state houses and the governor says he will sign it. The demand for these vouchers is very great and 22,000 slots is not going to satisfy the masses. Those candidates supporting vouchers are getting the votes!

Also...in spite of all the difficulties, homeschooling continues to explode in numbers. It is estimated that it is growing at 7 to 15% a year. Some communities are reporting increases of 30 to 50% increases from year to year.

[wintertime]

We are requiring that children be given a well-rounded secular education. If someone has some freaky religious objection to that, that is their problem. Take the kid to Sunday school. If that's not enough, teach them at home or send them to a religious school.

&&&&&&&&&&&7

This is YOUR personal educational philosophy. You are supporting a system that uses the threat of armed police, court, and foster care action against parents, and sheriff's auction of homes and business, to populate and fund your anointed educational vision.

By the way,,,,many consider the Amish "freaky". They took it all the way to the Supreme Court and WON!There are many other religious groups that are far more mainstream who would like the same freedom.

[wintertime]

This is just too silly for words. Afraid of "Biology cooties"??

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&777

The Amish were fearful of "English" cooties. They rightful claimed that association with the general population of government school children undermined the faith of their children.Guess what? They took it all the way to the Supreme Court and WON!

If Amish children had their traditions undermined by FORCED association with others not of their belief, why are other traditions somehow immune? Sorry! I don't get it. Oh,,,and remember Freedom of Association is a First Amendment right.

So...why shouldn't the same courtesy be extended to others ( religious and non-religious) who do not want cherished family cultural traditions undermined?

[wintertime]

it does not follow that teaching secular science that happens to threatens someone's religion is also illegal
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

The Amish complained and won.

So...if teaching secular science threatened their religion why are other traditions that are far less freaky immune?

[highball]

I would NEVER force my educational philosophy on other people's children.

We're not talking about anybody's "educational philosophy." We're talking about your being offended by your child being exposed to scientific facts. Teaching children Biology is not indoctrinating them.

If you really can't see the difference between scientific fact and ideology, then I'm sorry.

[wintertime]

We're not talking about anybody's "educational philosophy." We're talking about your being offended by your child being exposed to scientific facts. Teaching children Biology is not indoctrinating them.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

While you and I believe that "scientific facts" ( specifically evolution) are important to a child's education, this is OUR educational philosophy. Other parents do NOT want their children exposed to evolution. That is their right under the Seventeenth Amendment of our U.S. Constitution, and likely shared by all state constitutions as well.

If the Amish could take it to the Supreme Court and win, why should other religions be subject to your and my educational philosophy?

Honestly,,,,,if a young adult ( or older adult) can make up the deficiency in their evolution education by merely taking a non-credit colege biology course then this is NOT of such great importance that it justifies threatening parents with police and court action if they refuse to send their child to a government school where evolution is taught.

The solution of course is to begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education. Let parents, teachers, and principals decide these matters.

The appropriate course is for those who support evolution to persuade others to take courses in it, and read about it the lay and scientific literature.