Texas Supreme Court Sides With Family That Refuses To Educate Kids While Awaiting Rapture

[Fweethawt]

A fine example of how Christianity contributes to society.

 

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/texas-supreme-court-sides-with-family-that-refuses-to-educate-kids-while-awaiting-rapture/

 

If you thought you were about to be Raptured away into paradise, would you bother teaching your kids about things like math, science and literature?

 

One Christian family in Texas has been accused of refusing to educate their nine children because they believe the Rapture is imminent — and they’ve just won a big case in front of the Texas Supreme Court.

[mwc]

     I smell a new TLC reality series.

 

          mwc

[florduh]

WTF is wrong with Texans? There's a lot of competition for lowest common denominator and my own state of Florida is a strong contender. But Texas; damn!

[florduh]

Adults should be free to be stupid and self destructive if that's what they choose. Children, however, should be protected from parents who would deny them proper nutrition, medical attention or education.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Burnedout,

I agree with you in principle; but where does a parent's right become a child's abuse? These kids will end up ill-prepared to live in a world in which the rapture doesn't take place; thus having an impact on our society and future? Do we not have the right ourselves to prevent that?

[qadeshet]

Know Yourself!

 

You know what General Sheridan said about Texas...He would rather live in Hell. Cheers!

[LifeCycle]

Where do you draw the line? Bad parenting is bad parenting. I see obese kids all the time and it's more common today than it was in my generation and before that. 

 

You can't fix stupid. If parents want to doom their children's health, let them eat cake.

[florduh]

I don't get the "Total Freedom" mindset. I think it's rather obvious that a civilized society has an obligation to protect the innocent and defenseless from those who wish to impose their own brand of deleterious "freedom" on them. To force a child to grow up without education is abuse, no less so than withholding medical attention "for religious reasons" or forcing an anemic child into a parent's vegan lifestyle choice. Children are entitled to rights, too. Some parents are simply unfit to provide a healthy place for a child to thrive and mature. No one has a right to keep their child at a disadvantage because of a perverted notion of "rights."

[TheRedneckProfessor]

That escalated quickly.

[florduh]

If you think that a "Society" has a responsibility to protect children, I guess that applies to all but unborn children.  That has to be the ultimate form of child abuse.  But then of course there can be millions of excuses made about it not being able to feel anything, it is still an embryonic human child who will be violently ended.  

Society does continue the abortion debate and many consider a fertilized egg or embryo as fully human. Nobody said every member of society is of the same mind on every issue. The abortion issue that you are so fond of throwing into discussions these days, just to muddy the waters or simply cause trouble it seems, is hotly debated but quite distinct from the protection of children on whom everyone agrees are viable human beings.

 

But regardless, should all protections be removed simply because one protection (in your opinion) is not afforded?

[Fweethawt]

Know Yourself!

Okay... This know yourself stuff is kinda really getting extremely old and very repetitive like some strange brainwashing technique.

 

Think about what that looks like to to guests trying to get away from this very thing.

[Lilith666]

The Amish have their own culture. Yes, they live in America, but their lifestyle doesn't call for a lot of formal education. If these people plan to allow their children to live in mainstream society, they should have to abide by mainstream society's rules.

[Sybaris]

Not surprising

 

During a sermon the Pastor at my wife's church said, "We must be more concerned about our children's education about the afterlife than their education in this life"

 

 

We don't live in Texas though

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

That escalated quickly.

 

 

Escalated?  I was just matter-of-fact about it.  I was not trying to aim that at anyone directly.  I am just pointing out level of hypocrisy that is tolerated in general.  People get their panties in a bunch about it.  If people are going to piss and moan about somebody else doing with their own kids that is not physically harming them, then think that abortion is just hunky dory because that embryonic child is guilty of nothing more than being inconvenient. 

 

As florduh points out, the "debate" over abortion continues and there aren't really any easy answers.  "Embryo", "fetus", "unborn child"--whatever you want to call it--in reality it's just a pile of DNA neatly organized into cells.  But half of that DNA belongs to dear old dad; shouldn't he have as much right to decide what happens to his genetic material as mom has to decide what happens to her body?  That's a question that hasn't even entered the abortion "debate" yet.  But there is a clearly defined line which separates those who have been born from those who haven't, which makes it seem easier to pick a side in the on-going fracas.

 

In this case, however, we have children who have not only been born, but have lived long enough to reach the ripe old age of pre-pubescent awkwardness.  There are certain things they should know by now in the interest of simply being a well-balanced human being: things such as how to ride a bike or how to manipulate an extra cookie out of grandma.  Well, no harm, no foul if they don't.  

 

Other things, though, such as how to find Tanzania on a map or why common core is the stupidest possible way of learning math, would help prepare them for living within the society in which they will someday be taking a more active part, and even, Thor forbid, possibly raising children of their own.  In other words, there are certain things that the future of our society NEEDS to be taught, for the good of our society, and for the protection of ourselves in the autumnal years of our lives.  And, while knowing how to choose between paper or plastic at the grocery store has its place, it's not the kind of skill that's going to serve these kids over-much during their tenure here on this side of the dirt.  But how to spell, use correct grammar, and perform Gram Stains on bacterial cultures, could very well lead them to being genuinely productive slaves to the major corporations who control our society.

 

Here's real hypocrisy for you: bitch and moan about "creationism" being taught as an "alternative" to evolution; then defend parents' rights to enforce stupidity on their own kids.  Both contribute to the intentional dumbing-down of the American dream.  Why should one be a right, but the other, a fight? 

[Daffodil]

 

That escalated quickly.

 

 

 

Escalated?  I was just matter-of-fact about it.  I was not trying to aim that at anyone directly.  I am just pointing out level of hypocrisy that is tolerated in general.  People get their panties in a bunch about it.  If people are going to piss and moan about somebody else doing with their own kids that is not physically harming them, then think that abortion is just hunky dory because that embryonic child is guilty of nothing more than being inconvenient.

You want to talk hypocrisy - how about the hypocrisy of fighting to save unborn children then stating that people (mostly single mothers with children) should not be given any government help. Yeah, save the baby, then force that "precious life" to grow up poor and uneducated. Great plan there!

[Daffodil]

The question that comes out of this is, WHO effectively, for lack of a better term, owns the kids?  The parents or the state?  If people want to live off on their own and not participate in the rest of the surrounding culture, that is their right.  I would not do what those parents did, but nobody bitches about what the Amish do.  They only educate their kids to the 8th grade, I would rather families decide what is best for their kids.

 

I would rather families decide what's best for their kids as well, but when some of them clearly are not fit to make those decisions, what do you do? Ultimately, no one "owns" kids. They are people in their own right who have rights. Refusing to educate is a form of neglect (I wouldn't call it abuse, exactly), and should be treated as such.

[GirlOnFire]

Adults should be free to be stupid and self destructive if that's what they choose. Children, however, should be protected from parents who would deny them proper nutrition, medical attention or education.

 

 

As an educator, I do know that a lot of states have 'educational neglect' (failing to provide access to education for your children, contributing to chronic truancy, etc.) listed as a form of abuse.  It is *very* hard to prove, though, and often is only used against a parent if a child is enrolled in a school and the school reports chronic truancy to the state.  My guess is, these people probably claim to homeschool or unschool in order to stay off the state's radar, thus using whatever loopholes they could find to their advantage.  This most certainly *should* be considered educational abuse, though, in my opinion, based on what I know about educational law.  (Which isn't necessarily a tremendous amount, but I think sufficient enough to see this for what it is).

[miamia]

Totally freedom is anarchy, and it's a cycle isn't it? For everyone to get along and be productive there has to be some level of conformity.  The difference between an unborn fetus and a child it that the child will grow up and have an impact on the world, the fetus may or may not. it is a pile of organized cells, no memory, no feelings, etc. it is the potential of a life. now some would argue that destroying the potential of a life is as bad as destroying a life, but I don't believe in souls or the sacredness of life. Our social worth is in our memories and our connection to others. it is what you make it. enforcing conformity is the dividing line between chaos and lasting peace. The child will grow up to reinforce conformity, or spread chaos.  If conformity stops being enforced and every parent does whatever the hell they wanted with their children, tribes would form, war would ensue, the loudest yellers and strongest fighters would win out, and then in the end another system of conformity would evolve. 

Are individuals rights more important than what we have? it depends on who you ask. Would individuals have the commodity of rights if we didn't build our society in such a uniform manner? No. I think history can tell us that. Could there be a better way to do things? Absolutely. When we make sure that the children of our society are educated, we give them the ability to decide for themselves and more power to act on those decisions, the potential for more learning and growth. They will certainly not find a better way if left to their own devices being brainwashed by their parents to be superstitious and backward.

[miamia]

 

Totally freedom is anarchy, and it's a cycle isn't it? For everyone to get along and be productive there has to be some level of conformity.  The difference between an unborn fetus and a child it that the child will grow up and have an impact on the world, the fetus may or may not. it is a pile of organized cells, no memory, no feelings, etc. it is the potential of a life. now some would argue that destroying the potential of a life is as bad as destroying a life, but I don't believe in souls or the sacredness of life. Our social worth is in our memories and our connection to others. it is what you make it. enforcing conformity is the dividing line between chaos and lasting peace. The child will grow up to reinforce conformity, or spread chaos.  If conformity stops being enforced and every parent does whatever the hell they wanted with their children, tribes would form, war would ensue, the loudest yellers and strongest fighters would win out, and then in the end another system of conformity would evolve. 

Are individuals rights more important than what we have? it depends on who you ask. Would individuals have the commodity of rights if we didn't build our society in such a uniform manner? No. I think history can tell us that. Could there be a better way to do things? Absolutely. When we make sure that the children of our society are educated, we give them the ability to decide for themselves and more power to act on those decisions, the potential for more learning and growth. They will certainly not find a better way if left to their own devices being brainwashed by their parents to be superstitious and backward.

 

So you are saying the individual has no worth?  An embryonic child is still human.  Can't get around that fact. 

 

you can't get around that fact? or I can't? Worth is a subjective concept defined by the individual, just like morality. A human is just an organized bunch of cells fighting entropy. 2 cells or 37.2 trillion. Whether they "belong" to me or someone else, they are what I make of them if I have the power and the tools. Do you know where I got the power and the tools? education. 

 

In the words of jack sparrow, "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do." (yes I know, fiction. but still relevant)

[miamia]

 

 

 

Totally freedom is anarchy, and it's a cycle isn't it? For everyone to get along and be productive there has to be some level of conformity.  The difference between an unborn fetus and a child it that the child will grow up and have an impact on the world, the fetus may or may not. it is a pile of organized cells, no memory, no feelings, etc. it is the potential of a life. now some would argue that destroying the potential of a life is as bad as destroying a life, but I don't believe in souls or the sacredness of life. Our social worth is in our memories and our connection to others. it is what you make it. enforcing conformity is the dividing line between chaos and lasting peace. The child will grow up to reinforce conformity, or spread chaos.  If conformity stops being enforced and every parent does whatever the hell they wanted with their children, tribes would form, war would ensue, the loudest yellers and strongest fighters would win out, and then in the end another system of conformity would evolve. 

Are individuals rights more important than what we have? it depends on who you ask. Would individuals have the commodity of rights if we didn't build our society in such a uniform manner? No. I think history can tell us that. Could there be a better way to do things? Absolutely. When we make sure that the children of our society are educated, we give them the ability to decide for themselves and more power to act on those decisions, the potential for more learning and growth. They will certainly not find a better way if left to their own devices being brainwashed by their parents to be superstitious and backward.

 

So you are saying the individual has no worth?  An embryonic child is still human.  Can't get around that fact. 

 

you can't get around that fact? or I can't? Worth is a subjective concept defined by the individual, just like morality. A human is just an organized bunch of cells fighting entropy. 2 cells or 37.2 trillion. Whether they "belong" to me or someone else, they are what I make of them if I have the power and the tools. Do you know where I got the power and the tools? education. 

 

In the words of jack sparrow, "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do." (yes I know, fiction. but still relevant)

 

 

Except that there is also what is called, "Tyranny of the majority"  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority 

 

That is a pattern of behavior that happens, yes.