Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jdm

The author contends that outrage is not warranted because the L.A. Times misinterpreted the Judge’s decision. The author notes that the parents in question could have registered their homeschool arrangement as a private school and filled out a few forms in order to be in compliance with State law.

But what the judge said regarded the “ruse of enrolling [children] in a private school and then letting them stay home and be taught by a non-credentialed parent.”

This phrasing is hardly comforting to those, like the author, who believe that filling out a few forms would placate the judge. Filling out those forms to create a “private school” out of thin air would be just the sort of thing a judge like this would declare a ruse.

A measure of outrage is entirely warranted, IMHO.


30 posted on 03/06/2008 5:08:27 PM PST by RightOnTheLeftCoast ([Fred Thompson/Clarence Thomas 2008!])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: RightOnTheLeftCoast

Good post.


32 posted on 03/06/2008 5:09:44 PM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson