• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Let’s say there is a kid in school, a 13-year-old girl. We’ll call her Jane.

Jane is perfectly normal. She wears low-cut jeans that show a bare midriff with a pierced navel. She wears tight-fitting, revealing tops and lots of makeup. Her body is physically developing, and her interest in boys is all-consuming. Who cares about history or science when there are boys to impress with her booty?

Jane’s mouth is a bit foul. All her friends use four-letter words, so why shouldn’t she? Yes her parents object, but hey, they’re just the parents. They don’t know nothin’.

So now let’s take this perfectly normal kid, forcibly remove her from her school and plop her in the middle of a family of Christian homeschoolers. The parents object vehemently, but they’re overruled.

Jane is a little embarrassed that her new classmates are a couple years ahead of her in school, even though they’re the same age. But hey, academics aren’t Jane’s “thing” anyway. Boys are. And rebellion.

But she isn’t getting any support from her new peers. She never realized how her behavior in school must be reinforced by her peers in order to have meaning. When Jane suggests that maybe the teacher (mom) is, you know, kinda strict, the kids just look at Jane like she’s crazy. Of course she’s strict. That’s what teachers do – keep kids in line and make sure they learn.

When Jane shows up wearing her usual wardrobe, the teacher (mom) orders her upstairs to change into something more modest and scrub that makeup off her face. Jane has to borrow another girl’s clothes, because all of hers are now unacceptable. She reluctantly washes the makeup off.

When Jane tries to slut it up with the boys in the class, they look at her in disgust. Yes, she might be sexy, and yes they have hormones, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to act upon primal urges. They’ve been raised with manners and to respect girls.

Jane is getting depressed. She hates it here. She hates the self-righteous good behavior of these holier-than-thou brats. She hates the strict academic and behavioral expectations of her new school. She hates dressing like a frump instead of a tramp. Everything she’s has learned to hold dear: her attractiveness, her sexiness, her contempt for parental authority, her lack of interest in academics … it’s all blowing up in her face.

But there was this judge, you see, who ordered Jane into this rotten homeschooling environment, because he felt she needed a “more well-rounded education.” The judge thought her old school “had done a good job,” and it was great for Jane to “have that access,” and he has “no problems” with public education, but he felt homeschooling would be “a good complement and would make her stronger.”

So against the parent’s wishes, Jane is forced to associate with children she doesn’t like and placed in circumstances that threaten and disturb her worldview.

Yeah right. What a ridiculous scenario. No judge would ever order a public-schooled kid to be homeschooled.

But the reverse can be done, apparently at whim and for no good reason beyond the fact that the judge is playing God.

Read it for yourself. A judge ordered three normal, well-adjusted, academically superior children into public school, because, I don’t know, he was having a bad hair day or something.

The bizarre thing is the mother was not in court for anything having to do with school, home or otherwise. She was in court for some divorce proceedings, and the judge decided that decent, well-behaved Christian children are a bad thing and ordered them to get their beliefs and values “challenged.”

He wanted them to have a more “well-rounded” education. I assume his definition of well-rounded includes teaching children to put condoms on bananas, learn a sailor’s vocabulary, and discover that rebellion against one’s parents is a preferred state of affairs.

Read the facts behind the assertions in “The Harsh Truth About Public Schools” from WND Books.

The judge decided that homeschooling had “accomplished its purpose.” If by purpose he meant sound academics, decent morals, and high ethics … then he’s wrong.

Homeschooling hasn’t “accomplished” (past tense) that; it’s “accomplishing” (present tense) those things. No child is finished growing at the age of twelve. Their approaching teen years can either work wonders for their future as adults, or it can be the catalyst for future failures and heartbreak. Homeschooling will virtually guarantee that these three kids will grow into decent, moral adults.

This arrogant fool is apparently seeking job security by insuring lots of juvenile delinquents come through his courtroom. He admitted putting his own personal judgment in place of the mother’s. He is fixing what isn’t broken, and thereby breaking something that didn’t need fixing.

To add insult to injury, the mother (not the father, even though he’s the one allegedly having an affair) was ordered to undergo a mental evaluation. This is assumedly because she holds conservative Christian beliefs, thus implying that being Christian and conservative is a mental condition that should be overcome. May I suggest the judge be next in line? As in, can we get this guy’s head examined?

And let’s not forget that favorite buzzword used against homeschoolers, socialization. The judge suggested the homeschooled kids need to be “prepared for the real world” – as if the socialization experienced in public schools has even the remotest likelihood of cultivating a solid work ethic, moral behavior, and a happy family life – the cornerstones of productive adulthood.

This ruling is the top of a very slippery slope. If a judge can order homeschooled children into public schools for no reason besides his own “feelings,” all homeschoolers are threatened.

Please let this judge know your thoughts. Be polite, of course – profanity and name-calling never convinced anyone to change his mind. But only by hearing the cries of protest from concerned citizens can the judge realize what a mistake he’s making in ruining these kids’ lives. And if you live in North Carolina, contact your legislators.

This is judicial idiocy at its worst.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.