I wonder who would be in charge of deciding IF you were Christian enough to homeschool. All parents have the right to pass on their beliefs to their children, not just Christian parents.
Charles Lowers then goes on to use the example of
a mother helps her young daughter play "Pin the Molotov on the Cop Car" at the Anarchist Book Fair, San Francisco, California, March 18, 2006.
as someone who shouldn't be allowed to homeschool. I wonder if he would have been as outraged if they had been throwing the molotov at an abortion clinic?
Bomb found in Texas abortion clinic parking lot
Christian Terrorists Leave IED Outside Abortion Clinic
Responsibility claimed for abortion clinic bomb -A shadowy group calling itself the Army of God has taken responsibility for the recent bombing of an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, that killed one person.
I don't have a problem with a focused mission statement, such as: We're focused only on helping Christians find joy in homeschooling.
ReplyDeleteBut, yes, you point out an excellent conundrum: What does it mean to be a Christian, and how can you tell someone is one enough to fit into your mission?
I have personal experience with being told "you're not Christian enough" for something. ...interesting experience [smile]. I mean, I can understand saying to someone, "You're a hard core Wiccan, so you may not enjoy this Christian get together..." but... yeah. It's odd when professing Christians tell other professing Christians that they aren't "good enough" for something.
It feels rather unChristlike to me. Of course, as you point out, professing Christians have and continue to do many unChristlike things...
~Luke
I don't have a problem with a focused mission statement. I do have a problem if you say only a certain group should be allowed to homeschool.
ReplyDeleteI belong to an inclusive homeschool group and obviously we limit our members to those who can be tolerant and respectful of other members beliefs.Therefore we do not meet the needs of the homeschoolers who demand members sign statements of faith before joining their group or insist on members adhering to their narrow world view.
But I would never say that Fundamentalist Christians don't have the right to homeschool because of their beliefs.
I probably wouldn't pass their "Christian Enough" criteria.
ReplyDeleteBut then again, they might not pass mine. If I had one. A criteria, that is.
It certainly is a thought to ponder.
That's not the point. The right to homeschool exists for everyone (as long as we stay vigilant). However, homeschooling may not be beneficial for all children... such as those whose parents are hardcore Nihilists teaching nothing but anarchy and self-destruction.
ReplyDeleteAnd, like I said, homeschooling is not for children whose parents cannot provide a safe, loving, and educational home environment. Although said in cynicism, you actually stumbled upon a truth... Someone does need to decide IF parents are Christian enough to homeschool. Each family needs to come to that conclusion themselves. For the Christian homeschooler, homeschooling is also about getting your own house in order and ensuring that you are raising your children in the Lord.
Our goal is to raise children who love God and love their neighbors. And, since I'm not a Nihilist without a moral compass, I can make the judgment call that teaching your children to bomb police cars when the liberties of republican government are available is wrong.
Atheist, Pagans, Buddhist and parents of many other beliefs are all capable of providing a safe, loving, and educational home environment. Christians DO NOT have a market on good parenting skills and in fact MANY CHRISTIANS ARE LOUSY PARENTS.
ReplyDeleteThe litmus test for homeschooling should not be Christianity or ones lack of it.
I would say that anyone who is promoting violent acts that are not necessary for self-defense should not homeschool. That goes whether they are left-wing or right-wing militants and whatever faith (if any) they consider themselves to be.
ReplyDeleteFirst let me say that I think Charles was not making a hard case as to who should and should not homeschool, or that it should be Christians only; they just felt that perhaps the violent elements of the anarchist movement should not. I also agree completely with you, Alasandra regarding anyone deciding who can and cannot homeschool. Christians would probably be put first on that list by a government that views our moral objection to homosexuality as “hate speech” (which it clearly is not, but that’s another discussion.)
ReplyDeleteI would hope that Charles would be, as I am, outraged at this violence. However, I would like to point out the clear media bias here that again demonstrates that Christians are being “oppressed” (to put it into the vernacular of Liberation Theology.) Half of those headlines put the words “Christian” and “terrorist” together, a frequency far above any combination like “anarchist” and “terrorist” or “anti-government protestor” and “terrorist.”
Let’s look at William Ayers recent arguments. Using his logic, so long as they don’t try to kill anyone, they are just simple protestors. Christians should be able to bomb clinics during closed hours as part of their free speech, so long as no one is hurt. Ayers bombed a judge’s home while he and his family were in it, including a 9 year old boy. Would it be O.K. for people to do that to physicians that perform abortions, and then shall we make them university professors?
Look at this recent article about anarchists in Greece. Twice they are referred to as “self-styled anarchists” (aren’t they all by definition?) to place some distance between them and “main-stream” anarchists. Why do we not see “self-styled” Christians? Not once is the word “terrorism” mentioned. Instead we get, “Violence often breaks out between riot police and anarchists during demonstrations. Anarchist groups are also blamed for late-night firebombings of targets such as banks and diplomatic vehicles. The attacks rarely cause injuries.” Compare that to, “The device "was configured in such a way to cause serious bodily injury or death," said David Carter, assistant chief of the Austin Police Department.”
A keen difference exists between the anarchists and the Christians depicted in these articles. The anarchist book fair clearly demonstrates that those anarchists are, as a sizeable organization, actively teaching hatred and violence to their children. These “self-styled” Christians are not, nor is Christianity in general.
My thoughts: all speech should be protected no matter how extreme, and, as an extension of that, everyone should have a right to homeschool. All violence should be prosecuted, whether it is against people or property. What do we do with those that teach violence? As a culture, we must reject it and pressure the practice to stop; as for legislating it, that looks like the top of a slippery slope to me.
Again, Alasandra, another wonderful discussion!
This gets under my skin. As a Pagan homeschooler raising children with a semi-anarchist I wonder if they aren't tolerant enough to homeschool. Because I can guarantee we have a very stable moral compass in this house, and it certainly doesn't involve hating because based on what church they do or do not attend.
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with Kris. I was raised in a deeply religious area, and if you think they are not teaching violence then you are sorely mistaken. Fight the sinners, with homemade bombs if necessary, is encouraged. On the contrary we don't teach our children to practice random violence, we teach them to protect the people, with violence as a last result.
Everyone has brought up so many interesting points, I shall be mulling them over for some time.
ReplyDeleteThe Catechism of the Catholic Church is the complete and official teachings of Catholicism. We are not taught violence; rather we are taught to pray for those who disagree with us, and even for those who persecute us. Anyone who teaches otherwise is not teaching Catholicism.
ReplyDeleteWell the Crusades, blessed by the Pope do come to mind.
ReplyDeleteThen there is the Inquisition
Bloody Mary killing all the Protestants in defense of Catholicism.
Then Oliver Cromwell killing all the Catholics in defense of Protestant beliefs.
Religion has been used to justify some pretty nasty things.
Oh, I thought we were talking about current events, silly me!
ReplyDeleteI see you didn't mention the fact that the Crusades occurred because Muslims had violently wiped out most Christians around the world before the Europeans finally responded to their dying pleas.
The Inquisition occurred after several bouts of Muslims and Spaniards slaughtering each other depending on who had the upper hand.
Perhaps given the threat of annihilation by the Muslims, the Christians made a few mistakes.
You also don't mention the brutality of Queen Elizabeth towards Catholics as soon as she took power.
How about the Soviets gulags. How about the 210,000 Catholics priests slaughtered in Poland by the Nazis.
And how about TODAY, where Catholics worship in fear and secrecy in China.
Secularism IS BEING used to justify some pretty nasty things. You had to go back a few hundred years for your examples while I only have to pick up the newspaper to find mine.
And what about the enormous amount of GOOD brought about over the last 2,000 years by the Church?
Perhaps it is the fallen nature of Man is the problem. We cannot ascribe it to Religion, or Anarchy, or Marxism but rather to the violent nature of some that may be drawn into them.
The Catechism has been written with full knowledge and acceptance of our history. In that sense, Catholicism is wise from experience and has matured into the PEACEFUL faith it is TODAY.
That blog always cheeses me off.
ReplyDelete