Home Educators: Coming of Age in an Unfree Society

Introduction: Through an e-mail sent last December to HELM Harbor, HELM's e-mail list, I learned that the Bryant children had been placed into the custody of DSS. This news was totally unexpected, and I was stunned. What I learned about this situation has deepened my concern for the increasing forcible restraint of parental rights. Home educators have a responsibility to act in support for the Bryants and others waging battle in the front lines.

In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the Bryant family continues a five-year-old court battle which, though located on the battleground of homeschooling, is part of the much larger War Against Parents waged by the Nanny State against those parents who exercise their right to rear their offspring.

The Bryants are loving, caring, nurturing parents, there is no question of abuse or neglect, and there appears to be no allegation to the contrary; not even the whisper of innuendo disturbs this understanding on the part of all concerned. Yet DSS, the Massachusetts version of the Parenting Police, now has oversight — custody but not physical custody — of the children, who cannot be taken outside of the state of Massachusetts. DSS, although specifically not required to do so by the judge’s orders, has indicated that home inspections will be conducted. Sound unbelievable? It does. Because the old public-school refrain still bombards our minds with the state-sponsored mantra: “we live in a free society.”

To read more of the history of this story, visit http://www.educationalfreedom.com/pages/bryant.html

The Bryants are clearly being subjected to a massive power and control effort from local authorities as punishment for taking a principled stand based (legally) on the Massachusetts Constitution and (morally) on the inherent right to rear their offspring. The family has fought mostly alone and mostly unsupported by both the local homeschooling community and the national homeschooling support groups.

I will not concern myself with the intricacies of the apparent concern for maintaining the “don’t-rock-the-boat” politically-correct attitude responsible for this lack of support, as I have not the time, the energy, nor the patience. It is wrong for any support group purporting to offer support for home educators “inclusively” to fail to do so. It is a wrong action that can and should be corrected now and in the future.

The stand the Bryants are taking, regardless of any court-determined outcome, is one that benefits home educators everywhere; it benefits all parents, benefits all freedom-concerned individuals at every level, and at virtually no personal risk. The decision to support them should be a no-brainer.

Why isn’t it? Investigating the history of this case, reading the news reports, studying the sequence of events, and discussing it with others has affected me deeply on a personal level. It has been disappointing, depressing, distressingly heartbreaking to see the hesitancy to offer support displayed by some who are considered leaders in the home education movement.

It has been puzzling and shaking to hear the number of questions, and the nature of the questions asked regarding the details of the case. Support has apparently been considered dependent on “satisfactory answers” to irrelevant questions, justified by fear and trembling at the idea of possibly “squandering good will” toward home educators by supporting a family unless that family can meet the criteria — a criteria with nebulous details thus far undisclosed — for deserving support. It has caused me to question how, why, and in what way educational freedom has been pursued in the past and present, and to consider what actions I personally will take in the future.

How is it that home educators have come to be on a path where support for the Bryant family has been lacking, and where is that path leading?

Home educators are prone to proudly quoting a variety of propagandized statements made popular by some of the more prominent (and self-appointed) homeschooling spokesmen. My personal favorite is “It is now legal to homeschool in all 50 states.”

Indeed. Really. It is “legal”? What does that MEAN? That we are “allowed,” legally “authorized” to guide the direction of the education of our children? Allowed by whom? When was it “illegal”? The very fact that this statement is quoted as a source of pride is ominous, to say the least. To whom did we grant power to “allow” or “disallow” parental direction of the education of our children? Without even addressing the fact that, in some states, curriculum, approval, and testing regulations surround this “now legal” action to the point that what is allowed is so conditioned as to be almost untenable, this statement is pure poison, and we are toasting each other with it. However desperately home educators may wish to see their efforts as having accomplished some measurable achievement, this is not progress. Progress is not legality, however lenient the laws may be. Progress is to repeal any and all regulations that interfere with the exercise of inherent rights.

Efforts to “legalize” homeschool, to gain “legal authorization,” have amounted to no more and no less than a voluntary surrender of an inalienable right in exchange for a government-issued privilege.

Home educators play a thousand variations on the theme of “it really boils down to educating the general public on what homeschooling is about and how well the children fare.” Unfortunately, even though well-intentioned, this drive to “educate the public” is a double-edged sword, and such statements are in desperate need of dismantling and examination.

Educating the public about the benefits of home education is a worthwhile endeavor because of those very benefits of home education, and only because of those benefits to the children and parents thus freed to at least this degree from government control of their daily lives. In our race to spread the good news and thus empower families, it is imperative that we remember at all times that education of the public regarding those benefits is not to be confused with the seeking of public approval.

Public approval is often considered pragmatically necessary in today’s unfree society where restraint of individual liberty is a fact of life, even though often subtle and many times hidden with smoke and mirrors. It has been easier and far more comfortable in the short term for home educators to court public approval than to face the alternative of civil disobedience or court challenges. However, the long-term results are not a positive gain because public approval is subject to whims and fads and the direction of the wind, and should never be considered necessary to the exercise of an inherent right.

In seeking public approval, thereby easing the day-to-day requirements of an unfree society in order to exercise our right to direct the education of our children, we have frequently fought the wrong battles, using the wrong weapons. Our efforts have been reactive. Accused of isolating our children, we have fought the “socialization” myth by listing our activities and community endeavors. Questioned regarding our ability to guide their education, lacking that all-important “education in education” touted as necessary by invested Educrats, we responded with grade-level statistics, proving ourselves “worthy and able” by validating standards of measurement that are at best questionable, at worst harmful, and used in a failed system we have rejected.

There is nothing — absolutely nothing — in the track record of the “educate the public” effort to suggest that success in flirtations with public approval will serve the goal of increasing recognition that directing the education of one’s children is only a part of the inherent, natural, undeniable, and sacred right to rear our offspring. And it is that recognition that is vital to increasing educational freedom; no other result will serve.

To respond to most of these superficial, often blatantly ridiculous objections to home education has only granted them an undeserved validity. It is most probable that if ignored, they would have died a natural death from lack of attention.

On the other hand, there is much to suggest that “educate the public” efforts are dangerous. First, these efforts are dangerous because we can never “out race” the objections — there will always be a new one as long as the state’s claim to compelling interest is accepted by the public. Satisfying superficial objections and winning a degree of public approval may have helped swell the numbers of home educators, but by-and-large these efforts have attracted people more interested in superficialities than in individual freedom. A movement which experiences increased numbers due only to improved public opinion has attracted bandwagon hoppers, but not freedom fighters, and it is freedom fighters we need.

Second, these efforts are dangerous because the time and energy thus expended is needed in proactive efforts to educate, renew, and rejuvenate the innate desire that all purposive humans have for freedom to self-direct. Rather than concentrating our efforts on proving that home educators can “measure up” against the government-run, tax-funded school system, using the self-same standards designed by that system, there is a great need to proactively speak out, courageously and without apology, against the heresy of placing the minds of the children into the hands of the government.

The chief weapon against the years of indoctrination and brainwashing techniques that have convinced Americans that public education serves the needs of a free society is a steady provision of alternative ideas, a steady stimulation of the sleeping creativity of the public-schooled generation. As Charles R. LaDow said, “Education is altogether too important a thing, being the development of the individual, for government to have anything to do with it. If government were capable of directing the development of individuals, its products would not be free men.” We are not free men, this is not a free society, and there is no worthwhile result to be gained by sidestepping issues because of the fear that we will offend people still attached to the government-run, tax-funded school.

We have failed to investigate, discuss, and disseminate information on the dangers of government-controlled education, concentrating instead on its perceived academic failures rather than promoting an understanding of how well, indeed how most excellently public school accomplishes the established goals of any government entity. Because of this failure, new home educators turn toward home education from a variety of valid motivations, but do not continue to expand their understanding, do not continue to progress toward full development of the need for complete and unqualified rejection of government-controlled education. They thus remain vulnerable to seduction back into the system, diluting gains toward educational freedom by embracing insidiously debilitating ideas like tax-funded vouchers, participating in dual home/school programs, even pushing for legislatively-forced inclusion in other government-school activities.

Many home educators continue to vocally suggest and support the idea that government education is a viable “choice” for some parents because most home education leaders have failed to confront boldly, discuss without fear of offending sensibilities, and encourage the internally “owned” understanding that any option, any education alternative that infringes on the rights of others through the forced “contribution” of taxation is not a choice, but a coercion of others. Government-run, tax-funded education in any form cannot be considered a “choice” that parents have a “right” to indulge.

But most importantly, “educate the public” efforts are dangerous because hanging a hope for individual liberty on the gallows of public approval is pronouncing the death sentence on ourselves. “Educating the public on what homeschooling is about and how well the children fare” cannot even be considered a “means to an end” in efforts to increase educational freedom because the end is always always always implicit in the means. To ignore the dangers inherent in seeking public approval is to forge our own chains.

Efforts to “educate the public” and court “public good will” for homeschooling are the voluntary surrender of a natural right in exchange for submission to the will of the majority by those who fear the trampling of the rights of the minority. Although that fear is a realistic, fact-based reaction to the current unfree society, attempts to influence the will of the majority so that exercise of a natural right is among the acceptable options only changes the shape of the cage to one more aesthetically pleasing, more physically comfortable at the moment. But a cage is still a cage.

Because the language of liberty has been hijacked by those who would profit from a clouding of definitions —government cheerleaders and enthusiasts of all shapes and forms — leaders in the home education “movement” perpetuate myths and fantasies and illusions by talking in contradictory and confused terms of concepts about which they at best understand almost nothing, and at worst misunderstand completely.

Leading home education sites and publications are a veritable smorgasbord of Lacerated Liberty Language, with the accent on such phrases as “homeschool rights” when what is being discussed is privilege. The examples below are taken primarily from national and statewide home education groups, leaders and wannabee-leaders in the home education movement. 1

Fundamental rights do not require legality. Rights can be protected from the law, but they cannot be authorized by the law. Individual rights must be protected from government because of the recognized nature of all forms of government that have ever existed.

Historically, gains in individual freedom have been accompanied by written protection of rights, something once understood in this country. When the concept of inherent rights has been previously understood, and protections previously guaranteed, rights can be infringed only when the basic concepts become confused and clouded. Governments do not grant rights, laws do not grant rights, Constitutions (even!) do not grant rights. “Fundamental right to homeschool legally” is a phrase that literally screams “oxymoron”; and yet we have become so desensitized by the constant misuse of such phrases that we hear not even a whimper.

The what? The fundamental right to a public school education? Good grief. There is no fundamental right to a public school education. Train your mind to come to a screeching halt at every use of that phrase. Fundamental rights never ever ever exist by virtue of tax extortion.

It is no accident that the concept of “fundamental rights” is confused and clouded.

State Supreme Courts in Arizona, Wisconsin, California, Connecticut, Washington, Wyoming, West Virginia, Montana, Kentucky, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Tennessee, and Virginia have declared that education is a fundamental constitutional right.

State Supreme Courts in New Jersey, Michigan, Idaho, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, Colorado, Georgia, Arkansas, and Illinois have declared that education is NOT a fundamental constitutional right.

Lower courts in Alabama, Missouri, Minnesota, North Dakota, Washington and Ohio have declared that education is a fundamental right. In New Hampshire, lower courts declared that education is NOT a fundamental right.

COURTS RULINGS DO NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF RIGHTS. Rights are natural, inherent, sacred and undeniable, and written on the hearts of man at birth. You will not find public education written there. But you do not even have to look to know that what is there is the right to rear one’s offspring.

“… several home schooling families … have been harassed by their school districts. Home School Legal Defense Association is standing up to protect our members’ right to home school without illegal government monitoring." 2

Without “illegal” government monitoring? And exactly which forms of government monitoring of the parents’ right to rear their offspring is “legal” government monitoring? HSLDA has consistently proven that they consider “codified” government monitoring as “legal” government monitoring.

“… our right to homeschool as defined by … Legal/Legislative policy #1 … current state law provides for the legal practice of homeschooling as private schools …”

Engaging in the activity of homeschooling as defined by law has nothing to do with rights, but with government-issued privilege. What the government giveth, the government can taketh away.

“… the Home School Legal Defense Association is a national nonprofit organization of lawyers dedicated to protecting the right to home school throughout the United States and also around the world. At this time, we have 70,000 member home school families in the U.S. We were established in 1983 and have worked in the courts and the legislatures to help win the right for parents to home school in all 50 states.” 3

Rights are not won. Rights may be recognized and/or enumerated, and they may be protected, but they are not won. To convince the public otherwise is markedly beneficial to the continued financial survival of any profession that feeds on and from what we have elected to call our “justice system,” a huge bureaucratic blob, effectively a government-created public trough of “law” and “justice” that successfully self-perpetuates not because we are a crime-prone society, but because we are choking in a virtual death-grip of laws, laws, and more laws.

The primary allegiance of lawyers is to the court, to the law, and they are thus bound by oath. Their very existence depends on a market demand for services, a demand that increases in direct proportion to decreases in individual freedom. For home educators to place their faith in an organization of lawyers is an indication of how successfully we have been indoctrinated with the phrase “law-abiding good citizen.” We must wake up and shake it off, stop spending our time, money, and support on the fantastical illusion that “rights” need to be legislated, and consider carefully whether an organization of lawyers can be primarily dedicated to protecting rights when attorneys are bound by oath to the courts, to the “body of law” above all else, regardless of whether those laws are unconstitutional or violate inherent rights, enumerated or otherwise.

“So what is home schooling? Home schooling is exactly what the name implies: a school in the home. It is an age-old time-tested approach to education that uses the most successful method of instruction. The method is called the “tutorial method” of instruction.” 4

HSLDA has helped “win” the “right” for parents to have a school in the home that uses the “tutorial method.” And with friends like that . . . . My home is not a school, and raising a family is not “using the tutorial method.” There are many successful methods available for family-based education, and all offer decided benefits to the family, the basic unit of a free society, and the basic unit of this society before public education became a vehicle of its destruction as necessary for the promulgation of collectivism.

I have a right to raise my children by virtue of the fact that I live and breathe and they are my children, and that right includes each and every parenting decision, those that may, and those that may not, be defined by the word “education.”

“… right to homeschool has been clearly established and homeschooling is legal in some fashion in every state …”

IF the right to homeschool had been clearly established, the “legal in some fashion” phrase would not be included.

In an online press conference in 1999, Michael Farris of HSLDA stated “We believe that our good academic performance warrants greater freedoms even though every year the education establishment attempts to curtail our freedoms in a significant number of states.” 5

Rights are not conditioned on good academic performance. The phrase “warrants greater freedoms” — like the phrase “time off for good behavior” — is the language of prisoners, not the language of a free people.

‘It is hard to be sure of anything among so many marvels. The world is all grown strange…. How shall a man judge what to do in such times?’ … ‘As he has ever judged,’ said Aragorn. ‘Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man’s part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house.’ ~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings, Book III, Chapter 2.

To understand and admit that this is an unfree society is, initially, definitely uncomfortable. We have built a form of “national identity” that labels us as citizens of the land of the free, based on a past Constitutional experiment that has been effectively destroyed through unconstitutional application.

This “national identity” is a primary weapon used to keep the masses of unfree individuals living “lives of quiet desperation,” often puzzled that they really don’t feel so “free” after all. However, in the wake of the “it’s gonna be a long one folks” War on Terrorism and the steady and insistent undermining of civil liberties, we cannot afford to be squeamish. We cannot afford to engage in “world comparisons” for reassurance. We cannot continue to compare our standard of living to others in order to be reassured of the greatness of our country. It is irrelevant to individual freedom whether we have more or less materially, or whether we have more or less freedom than citizens of other countries. Individual freedom is not a comparative measurement, and a free society is a product of individual actions taken yesterday, not actions taken today.

We have lost individual freedom based on decisions made by our grandparents and by their grandparents — or more truthfully, based on decisions that they did not make. They did not make uncomfortable decisions to defend against encroachment, did not, indeed, recognize and admit encroachments because recognition would have led to conscious understanding of the need to act when not acting was so much easier, so much less complex.

If we wish our children and grandchildren to have individual freedom, we must act now, today.

‘We must walk open-eyed into that trap, with courage, but small hope for ourselves. For, my lords, it may well prove that we ourselves shall perish utterly in a black battle far from the living lands; so that even if Barad-dûr be thrown down, we shall not live to see a new age. But this, I deem, is our duty. And better so than to perish nonetheless ? as we surely shall, if we sit here ? and know as we die that no new age shall be.’ ~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings, Gandalf in Book V, Chapter 9.

We cannot afford to rest on our laurels; we have not the luxury of not acting because the walls are closing in at ever-increasing speed. The initial discomfort will pass; facing truth, even hard truth, will eventually bring a different type of comfort, a real comfort, the like of which you can experience in no other way. It is the exit door from The Truman Show. Twenty-five years is long enough to spend in a crawl — it is time for home educators to stop.

Acceptance that this is an unfree society will end the crawling. The operative premise here is that objects (including humans!) will continue in motion in the established path unless some opposing force interferes. Acceptance that we live in an unfree society is that opposing force that will stop the crawling. It is the first step to coming of age in an unfree society.

‘And it is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world. We should seek a final end of this menace, even if we do not hope to make one.’ ~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings, Gandalf in Book II, Chapter 2.

Real examination and determination of core beliefs is possible once there is acceptance of the true nature of our unfree society and the direction in which it is moving. Home educators are typically polarized over inconsequentials, and primarily because they are dealing not with the truth of an unfree society, but with those superficialities that keep us busily blind to that fact. To accept that we are currently in an unfree society frees one to determine what is important, what is necessary to change that fact.

Malagant: Other people live by other laws, Arthur. Or is the law of Camelot to rule the entire world? Arthur: There are laws that enslave men, and laws that set them free. Either what we hold to be right and good and true is right and good and true, for all mankind, under God, or we’re just another robber tribe! ~ William Nicholson, First Knight

It is basic and fundamental to progress that we understand that there is no such thing as a natural inherent right that does not belong to all others. Home education is the exercise of the right to parent our offspring, and therefore the same freedom to determine the direction of education of their children must be granted to all others, without exception.

To decide that others “deserve” the “freedom” to home educate “if” — if they use a traditional curriculum; if they prove their morality and/or righteousness; if they do not belong to what you define as a cult; if they fit any self-determined norm at all — is to decide that others may determine whether you yourself may home educate. It is impossible, an irreconcilable contradiction, to believe you have “natural inherent rights” that do not belong to all others. Any action conditioned upon any other characteristic or behavior — other than that the rights of others are not infringed — is not a right, but a privilege. If you determine conditions are necessary, you have voluntarily surrendered a right for a privilege and should determine — and oh-so-carefully — whether you have reason to believe you will always be among the privileged.

Examination and determination of core beliefs will raise us from the crawling position to our knees; it is the second step to coming of age in an unfree society.

Once core beliefs have been determined, we must dare to be honest, dare to offend. We must confront boldly those who would make the right to home educate, the right to rear one’s offspring, conditioned upon their own ideas of correct methods, even — and perhaps especially — if you agree with these methods!

We must confront boldly not only ideas directly related to home education, but ideas that would restrict individual freedom in any area, for educational freedom can exist only in a society that values individual freedom in all areas. If you believe, along with Thomas Jefferson, “that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical,” then you must dare to identify public education as the evil it is, and without fear.

Honesty offends not those who are willing to examine their own beliefs, and those unwilling to examine their beliefs are best left by the wayside; they will serve no purpose in the battles now and yet to come. Popularity contests have never advanced freedom. It is the nature of the conflict between individual freedom and government that individual freedom is always either advancing or retreating; standing still has never been an option.

‘Other evils there are that may come; for Sauron is himself but a servant or emissary. Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule.’ ~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings, Gandalf in Book V, Chapter 9.

Honesty will get us off our knees and standing up. It is the third step to coming of age in an unfree society.

For home educators to not only stand up from their knees, but start to walk, we must be willing to act with courage, to take principled stands without wavering, even when giving in would be so much easier.

Steps that reflect courage differ from person to person, from situation to situation.

‘Always after a defeat and a respite, the Shadow takes another shape and grows again.’ ? ‘I wish it need not have happened in my time,’ said Frodo. ‘So do I,’ said Gandalf, ‘and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.’ ~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings, Book I, Chapter 2.

I am not now, nor have I ever, advocated that any home educator take steps that truly endanger the sanctity of their family. That is not courage, but foolhardiness, for if we lose our family, what exactly is it that we hope to gain? However, the greatest weapon in the hands of the Parenting Police is the fear and trembling that the very idea of a possible examination of our life brings on the part of parents who KNOW they are doing nothing wrong. Understand exactly how far you will go in refusing to give in to this intimidation, and be prepared by developing plans to keep your children out of their hands should you come into direct conflict with them. It is far easier to give in, for there is no greater weapon than the threatened loss of our children. But in giving in, in taking any action solely from fear of the Parenting Police even when not directly threatened, we are daily granting a government agency a horrible and vicious power over the family that is growing by leaps and bounds. Hope for the best and prepare for the worst by developing Escape Plans.

“Yet I have always believed that problems should be solved by those who see them ? that when a difficulty presents itself the person who becomes aware of it should answer it instead of trying to pass it to someone else.” ~ Stephen R. Donaldson, The Mirror of Her Dreams, Myste in Chpt 15.

Courage is contagious. The Parenting Police have gained power because we have maintained silence against known abuses, and we have, to some degree, maintained silence because there is a veil of silence unbroken. And yet, as we gather with friends and neighbors and talk of these abuses in hushed tones, we know, we KNOW in our hearts that there is a silent majority. The veil of silence must be broken, but it is only individuals with courage who can break it. Speak out against abuses; examples of courage will inspire others to speak out also. We can dispel the veil of silence, one voice at the time.

Do what you can when you can, but DO IT. Don’t wait on someone else, but be that someone else that others are waiting to see.

Courage is the fourth step that home educators must take to come of age in an unfree society. With courage, we will begin to press forward, to walk a different path.

The Bryants have taken a principled stand based (legally) on the Constitution of Massachusetts and (morally) on the right to raise their offspring. They need, deserve, and should have the support of home educators, of all freedom-loving individuals. Home educators, if they want to survive in an unfree society moving steadily toward collectivism, should be giving that support without question.

We can make a difference by standing strong and united against this abusive battle against the family. No political ideology, no wrong, no evil can stand if we have the courage to act. The Bryants have acted — the least we can do, the very LEAST we can do, is speak in support of them.

Having spent my sleepless nights examining the previous lack of support, I find that now I care not so much why they have not had support as what can be done to change that fact. The purpose here is not condemnation of that lack of support —although certainly it is deserving of condemnation by freedom-loving individuals — but hopefully, an evaluation that leads to the search for and discovery of alternate paths and actions more evocative of long-term benefits to parents.

To quote Kim Bryant, “an individual cannot win freedom for everyone ... people have to find their own way ... principles do have to be in the people individually.” Their battles have taught her what we must learn. We can only win freedom for ourselves, individually, and we win it by having the courage to act individually. Freedom is internally gained, not externally granted.

You can start to achieve that freedom for yourself; you can begin to step down that different path by taking action to support the Bryants, action that speaks out against the growing abuse of the right to rear our offspring.

Letters of support to be delivered to the Governor regarding the Massachusetts judiciary can be sent to:

Council for family of George Greeley c/o Friends of the Constitution P.O. Box 620115 Newton Lower Falls Massachusetts 02462

Aim higher, dream bigger, and dare to be honest. Forge new trails and climb higher mountains. It is only by being a part of the remnant that continues to strive toward individual freedom that we can extend hope for our children and grandchildren. Home educators, by coming of age in an unfree society, can make a difference. We can, and we must. Let’s do it.

Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and tho’ We are not now that strength which in old days Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are - One equal temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. ~ Alfred Tennyson, Ulysses

1 Some of the phrases in the quotes listed are quite frequently used and were found more than once.

Because the purpose of listing these quotes is not direct and specific criticism of the authors, but rather the evaluation of language used, examination of the concepts of right vs. privilege, and encouraging consideration of the direct and indirect effects of misused language upon thought processes, specific source references are not given except where the organization or individual is directly identifiable.

4 ibid. 5 http://www.hslda.org/docs/study/rudner1999/ChatLog.pdf. Quote verified 2/17/02.

Here are links to various education threads (also containing numerous helpful links)

FReegards

Deconstructing Public Education
Source: www.newsmax.com; Published: July 26, 2002;
Author: Diane Alden
Specious Science In Our Schools
Source: Toogood Reports; Published: July 9, 2002;
Author: Alan Caruba
SYMPOSIUM Q: Is the National Education Association Being Fair to Its Religious Objectors?
Source: INSIGHT magazine; Published: June 10, 2002;
Authors NO: Stefan Gleason ////\\\\ YES: Bob Chase
Public Sector Subverting Productive Industry
Source: Toogood Reports; Published: May 16, 2002;
Author: Henry Pelifian
History of America's Education Part 2: Noah Webster and Early America
Source: Sierra Times; Published: March 27, 2002;
Author: April Shenandoah
How Communist is Public Education?
Source: sierratimes.com; Published:March 22, 2002;
Author: Chuck Morse
History of America's Education Part 1: Johnny is in trouble
Source: Sierra Times; Published: March 20, 2002 ;
Author: April Shenandoah
Audit rips Georgia schools' curriculum
Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution; Published: March 11, 2002;
Author:JAMES SALZER
Why schools fail: Samuel Blumenfeld warns Bush's education legislation is ineffective
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: March 2, 2002;
Author: Samuel Blumenfeld
Public School Isn't Like I Remember It
Too Good Reports; Published: February 28, 2002;
Author: Phyllis Schlafly
What Is Lacking In Our Educational System
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: February 28, 2002;
Author:| Ben Cerruti
The charade of education reform
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: February 2, 2002;
Author: Dr. Samuel L. Blumenfeld
American public schools: Working just as designed
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: January 21, 2002;
Author: Vox Day
High Schools Fail Thanks To Grade Inflation And Social Promotion
Source: Toogood Reports; Published: December 5, 2001
Author: Vin Suprynowicz
WHY AMERICANS CAN’T READ
Source: Accuracy in Media; Published: December 4, 2001
Author: Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid
The Failing Teacher and the Teachers' Code of Silence
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 3, 2001
Author: Glenn Sacks
Time for outrage! Linda Bowles reports latest results in America's public schools
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: November 27, 2001
Author: Linda Bowles
Illiterate in Boston: Samuel Blumenfeld explains U.S.'s ongoing reading problem
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: July 20, 2001
Author:Samuel Blumenfeld
NEA - Let our children go!
Source: WorldNet Daily; Published: June 23. 2001
Author: Linda Harvey
COOKING THE BOOKS AT EDUCATION
Source: Accuracy In Media; Published: June 5, 2001;
Author: Cliff Kincaid
Why Do Schools Play Games With Students' Minds ?
Source: The Detroit News; Published: April 1, 2001
Author: Thomas Sowell
The Public School Nightmare: Why fix a system designed to destroy individual thought?
Source: http://home.talkcity.com/LibraryDr/patt/homeschl.htm
Author: John Taylor Gatto
Dumbing down teachers
Source: USNews.com; Published: February 21, 2001
Author: John Leo
Free Republic links to education related articles (thread#8)
Source: Free Republic; Published: 3-20-2001
Author: Various
Are children deliberately 'dumbed down' in school? {YES!!!}
Source: World Net Daily; Published: May 13, 2001
Author: Geoff Metcalf {Interview}
Could they really have done it on purpose?
Source: THE LIBERTARIAN; Published: 07/28/2000
Author: Vin Suprynowicz
New Book Explores America's Education Catastrophe
Source: Christian Citizen USA; Published: April 2000
Author: William H. Wild
Deliberately dumbing us down (Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt's, "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America"
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: December 2,1999
Author: Samuel L. Blumenfeld
Deconstructing the Western Mind: Gramscian-Marxist Subversion of Faith and Education
Source: www.petersnet; Published: Winter 1997
Author: Frank Morriss
Littleton Crisis to Government Control
The UN Plan for Your Mental Health

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.