With few exceptions, the progressive liberal Democrats would love to have a law just like this in New Hampshire.
Homeschooling was made illegal in the country in 1938 (…) and the law has never been repealed, but rather strengthened. In 2007, the German Supreme Court ruled that the country’s mandate that children be sent to public school is necessary to “counteract the development of religious and philosophically motivated parallel societies.”
Want to read the entire paragraph?
Uwe and Hannelore Romeike fled to the United States in 2008 after German authorities demanded that they stop homeschooling their six children. Homeschooling was made illegal in the country in 1938 under the dictatorship of Adolph Hitler, and the law has never been repealed, but rather strengthened. In 2007, the German Supreme Court ruled that the country’s mandate that children be sent to public school is necessary to “counteract the development of religious and philosophically motivated parallel societies.”
And then there’s this bit that follows.
German officials have been cracking down on families that keep their sons and daughters at home, and have threatened them with fines, imprisonment and even the removal of the children from the household. The Romeike children were taken from their parents for a time before fleeing to the United States for refuge.
These people just wanted to be left alone to raise their kids and teach them at home. The modern German government said screw you, you have to send your whelps to the government-run propaganda mill or else. Now doesn’t that sound familiar? Who else, for years and years, has tried to make Home-Schooling as difficult as possible (or impossible) in New Hampshire?
New Hampshire Democrats.
The Romeike’s Catch a break, or maybe not.
A US judge granted the Romeike’s asylum which made them happy, but Democrats have banned happy families in America so some busy-body challenged the decisions, took it to the 6th circuit, and now Obama’s Justice department wants them deported. Over what?
“[Eric Holder’s office] argued that there was no violation of anyone’s protected rights in a law that entirely bans homeschooling,” HSLDA president Michael Farris explained to reporters. “There would only be a problem if Germany banned homeschooling for some but permitted it for others.”
Home-schoolers are typically looking for a more focused learning environment with a more stringent curriculum that better expresses their values. These kids are almost to the last better educated, and they should be; smaller classrooms are best, right public unions/teachers/democrats?– but not if they are so small as to be called home-schooling. Home schooling is too small a class. Too much individual attention. No union indoctrinated/government controlled, cattle-call, a-moral learning environment. See also–“we must have your children!”
Coming here for education- freedom? Big mistake. And homeschooling and religious rights are two things Democrats see as barriers to their statist agenda so Holder’s gotta step in and nip that in the bud or nice, clean-cut, religious families from all over the globe might show up and start polluting the public with their outdated religious and education values. Ick!
“The U.S. government contended that the Romeikes’ case failed to show that there was any discrimination based on religion because, among other reasons, the Romeikes did not prove that all homeschoolers were religious, and that not all Christians believed they had to homeschool,” he continued. “[Holder] does not understand that religious freedom is an individual right.”
You see the problem? They should have come here demanding free condemns instead of that flimsy religious liberty crap.
It would have been even better if they had sneaked in illegally. Not only will Democrats embrace you when you do that, they will champion whatever rights you want to claim you have, spring for housing and a stipend, give you all the free contraception you can carry, and they might even help pay for your college tuition if you can manage to avoid becoming a citizen long enough. (If you claim to be a drug lord and wait on the other side of the Rio Grande you might even score some free assault rifles which they object to you buying if you are a law-abiding US citizen.)
Just don’t say anything about home-schooling.
As for New Hampshire Democrats, they are probably eyeing that 1938 law right now, trying to figure out how they can get the courts to force children into the union-dominated-campaign-money-laundering machine known as public education so that they can… “counteract the development of religious and philosophically motivated parallel societies.”
Then we could expect more of this.
A 10-year-old homeschool girl described as “well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level” has been told by a New Hampshire court official to attend a government school because she was too “vigorous” in defense of her Christian faith.
In addition to homeschooling, the girl attends supplemental public school classes and has also been involved in a variety of extra-curricular sports activities, the ADF reported.
But during the process of negotiating the terms of the plan, a guardian ad litem appointed to participate concluded the girl “appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith” and that the girl’s interests “would be best served by exposure to a public school setting” and “different points of view at a time when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief … in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs.”
According to court documents, the guardian ad litem earlier had told the mother, “If I want her in public school, she’ll be in public school.”
She just wants to …“counteract the development of religious and philosophically motivated parallel societies.” (Or something.)