From New American:
"A New Hampshire family-court judge has decreed in a July 13, 2009 ruling that a 10-year-old home-schooled child must now go to a government school in order to teach her to be less “rigid” and foster “tolerance” in her religious beliefs.
Was it because the child was falling behind or socially backward?
"The judge made this order despite finding that the child “is generally likable and well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising, and intellectually at or superior to grade level.”
So what right did the court have to step in and tell the parent how to educate their child? Was this simply because he didn't agree with the child's religious upbringing? Should the parent or the government have the final say in how to raise the child?
Read the full story here.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
1 comment:
This forum is open to anyone with a desire to express him/herself with respect, civility, and understanding. Please remember, therefore, that comments are not always reflective of the opinion of this website and its community. We reserve the right to delete any commentary or content, including, but not limited to, material that is obscene, profane, irrelevant, or otherwise inappropriate as per our discretion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Looks to me like this was a disagreement between a divorced father and mother over how the child should be schooled. The judge sided with the father, who did not want the child just taught intolerance. The mother is still free to give her opinion to the daughter.
ReplyDelete