[COMMENT: This criminal usurpation by our government has been going on in principle ever since government began to get control of education back in the 1830's. The public school system was never meant to educate (set free with truth) the children, it was designed right from the start by Horace Mann & Co. to control children.
How do I know that? Well, (1) by reading the history of the matter (see Is Public Education Necessary? and NEA: Trojan Horse in American Education by Samuel Blumenfeld). And, (2) by looking at the nature of government.
Government may have many purposes, but the one identifying purpose is to control. We make laws to compel something (drive on the right side of the road) or to forbid something (stealing). Laws are about force and coercion, not about setting people free -- unless very carefully designed -- as per our original Declaration of Independence and Constitution.
But people who do not respect either truth or freedom want to use government-controlled education to remold the public, not because they have respect for the public, but because they believe the public is not capable of handling its own affairs and needs their expertise to run their lives. And they are succeeding.
Question: What are you, dear reader, going to do about it?
This website is one of my attempts to educate people to the mess we are in and the way out. Jesus is still Lord, and He still knows the way to freedom, both personal and political. God owns the intellectual, moral, and spiritual high ground, and is inviting us to stand there with Him. If we are willing to pay the price. See Education Library for more details on the control mechanisms in place in our education system.
And get your children out of public schools. E. Fox]
This is a
WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47267
Posted: November 7, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Doug Powers © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Just when you thought kids were safer now that Michael Jackson is out of the country ...
In Kelo vs. New London, Conn., the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that it was OK to rob people of their property if the community (community of government) could collect more taxes if somebody else owned the property. Now, out west, the legendary 9th Circuit Court has, in essence, proclaimed that the government has a sort of sexual eminent domain over children in public schools.
"Eminent domain" is the right of the government to seize peoples' private property for public use. "Sexual eminent domain" is the right of government to seize kids' privates for public use.
The 9th Circuit, whose rulings cover nine states (10 if you count "shock"), found that parents have no constitutional right to prevent public schools from providing information on the subject of sex to their students in any forum or manner they choose. Anybody else, however, could still be sent to San Quentin for doing the same thing.
In this particular case, the 9th upheld a lower-court ruling and threw out a lawsuit brought by parents against a school district north of Los Angeles that distributed surveys to students which contained questions on sexual issues.
The survey was given to first, third, and fifth graders, and the questions were of a nature that, were they asked by anybody but "professional educators", the questioner would have been jailed as a suspected pedophile.
Questions on the survey dealt with the following:
Add a chimp, Ferris wheel and wine cellar to the equation and this "survey" was edging dangerously close to a Neverland Ranch entrance exam. How in the world could kids "stop thinking about sex" when these public-school perverts wouldn't allow them to?
The school says the survey was given to children in the first, third and fifth grades as part of a program to gauge early trauma and help youngsters overcome barriers to learning. I'm guessing the test was conducted by "trained professionals" who themselves tested positive for No. 1 and No. 6.
The school stopped conducting the survey in 2002, amid complaints from parents, but the precedent will last forever, at worst – or until it's overturned, at best.
What was the reasoning? A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit concluded the following:
It's impossible to have a discussion about the continued breakdown of schools and courts without talking about homeschooling.
One of the arguments against homeschooling by public-school advocates is that most parents are "not qualified" to teach kids.
With that in mind, travel from school to school some day and play a game of "count the obese gym instructors who the NEA considers 'qualified' to teach physical education." It's not unfair to assume that instructors in other topics could be equally as "qualified."
As for the 9th's ruling, I'm willing to bet that, if the tables were turned, parents would have more say over what their children are taught and asked by public schools. What do I mean? Well, let's assume there's some school under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit that is very conservative in its sexual teachings.
Then along comes a parent – some nosy, whiny, doorknob polishing liberal activist who thinks that there should be a "history of masturbation" class. I'll bet next month's mortgage payment that all of a sudden the 9th Circuit would rule that parents should have a say in kids' public education.
One final question: If parents are excluded in all aspects of their children's education, wouldn't that exclusion make "public" schools in reality "private" schools? Maybe there's a loophole for recourse for parents, since the 9th's ruling doesn't exercise dominion over private schools.
Sure that's a stretch, but after observing the 9th Circuit's rulings over
the years, major stretching is allowed.
Doug Powers' columns appear every Monday on WorldNetDaily and various newspapers around the country. Doug's first book, "'Because That's the Way God Decided to Do It!' – A Conservative Father Fields Confusing Questions From His Confused Kids About A Confusing World" can now be purchased at Booklocker.com.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *