Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Holder on Banning Home Schooling


  • Please log in to reply
169 replies to this topic

#76    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:12 PM

View PostStellar, on 17 February 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

Is that in your bill of rights?

No. It's something that the States have individually agreed to allow, to greater or lesser degrees. In California, for example, you need to be a registered private school, preferably with a teaching credential issued by the State of California.

Besides which - people are missing the point entirely.

Holder has two choices - either defend the position that homeschooling is not a fundamental human right or rubberstamping the entire population of Germany's eligibility for legal asylum within the US on the basis that their government's restrictions on home schooling are a human right's violation.

Plus every other country in the world following the German model.

It's all fun and games until 500 million immigrants arrive, citing homeschooling human right's violation as to why they can not be denied US residency.

Edited by Tiggs, 17 February 2013 - 07:13 PM.


#77    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:25 PM

Thats an immigration issue then and not a homeschooling one.

So hes going to "threaten" to take away Americans rights because Germans cant home school there kids. Why do we not distance ourselves from the issue and theres no reason for us to alter our laws based on another countries laws. Alot of Americans died fighting Nazi German (not the same place today I know) so by God theres no reason we should feel obligated to have anything to do with there internal political situation including giving asylum to any Germans we deem not appropriate. That would only be common sense after fighting a WW2 WW1 with as country. Germany along with Japan should have the most styrict immigration policies placed on them based on these events to the USA.

I think this is an example of why. There politics are getting messed into ours. Let them take there Homeschooling Human Rights issue to the Hague as that what its there for.

OK..end rant....and no offense meant to our German nor Japanese friends. Attitudes have changed but doesnt mean policy should not reflect history. Lest we forget were wee have been.


#78    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:30 PM

Its not like Americans are getting asylum anywhere in the World from as far as I can tell.


#79    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Ntwadumela- He who greets with fire

  • Member
  • 12,651 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in the depths of my mind

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:44 PM

View PostTiggs, on 17 February 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

No. It's something that the States have individually agreed to allow, to greater or lesser degrees. In California, for example, you need to be a registered private school, preferably with a teaching credential issued by the State of California.

If liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a right, then home schooling easily falls under fundemental rights. IMO it would be unconstitutional to denie someone the right to home school thier children. So long as the education provided meets the states standard. If we were forced by law to make children attend public school, if you can provide a education at least equal to it, thats tyrannical.


Quote


Holder has two choices - either defend the position that homeschooling is not a fundamental human right or rubberstamping the entire population of Germany's eligibility for legal asylum within the US on the basis that their government's restrictions on home schooling are a human right's violation.

Plus every other country in the world following the German model.

It's all fun and games until 500 million immigrants arrive, citing homeschooling human right's violation as to why they can not be denied US residency.
Having guns is obviously a right here in America. That doesnt mean we would have to let anyone from other countries in cause thier country banned them. If this government decided they didnt want this family to come here from Germany, that is within thier authority. Id personaly find it pretty hypocritical considering thier very laid back attitude regarding illegals south of our boarder, but whatever.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#80    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:53 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 17 February 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

Thats an immigration issue then and not a homeschooling one.

So hes going to "threaten" to take away Americans rights because Germans cant home school there kids.

He's not threatened anything.

What he's said is that not being allowed to homeschool children in another country does not give someone a free ticket to US residency under the guise of religious persecution.

He's also said that there is no explicit right granted to citizens, no restriction within the Constitution which would stop the Government legislating against homeschooling, if they wished to do so.

Which there isn't.


View Postpreacherman76, on 17 February 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

If liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a right, then home schooling easily falls under fundemental rights.

If the Constitution granted people the right to do whatever made them happy, including ignoring any government legislation, then not a single criminal conviction would have ever been made.

Quote

Having guns is obviously a right here in America.

Under international law, not being able to carry a gun isn't considered a human right's violation. Religious persecution, on the other hand, is.



Edited by Tiggs, 17 February 2013 - 07:53 PM.


#81    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:01 PM

Quote

He's also said that there is no explicit right granted to citizens, no restriction within the Constitution which would stop the Government legislating against homeschooling, if they wished to do so.

This is where we disagree. I believe we very much are given this right moreso in the points Preacherman has brought up then my own. I also understand what you are saying that there is no specific mentioning of homeschooling in the BOR. However at the time of its writing schooling was done by the churches for the most part and if not it wasw homeschooling that was the norm. So one could actually say there is no precedent for national school system and that that is in fact what is Unconstitutional.

It would be very Democratic to Legislate another section of our lives and it would be Patriotic of Americans to pick up a gun to defend our God given Rights.

Holder is 100% wrong and he should know better being the chief attorney of this country. But then again he probably got a public school education. So perhaps did not learn any history of this country. It most definently is not a Federal issue to ban or not to ban homeschooling can we it least agree on that ?

Edited by AsteroidX, 17 February 2013 - 08:03 PM.


#82    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:03 PM

Tiggs

I find the notion of "explicit right" a bit troubling.  It suggests complete ignorance of the letter and spirit of the Ninth Amendment.

A few months ago on some issue or another Holder spoke for the jury.  He had decided not to indict anybody in this case (maybe it was some banking case?) because he just knew that no jury would convict this person or persons.  I find that to be arrogant, the gubmint man speaking for the jury.

I'm not a fan of Holder. :no:


#83    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:05 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 17 February 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

This is where we disagree. I believe we very much are given this right moreso in the points Preacherman has brought up then my own. I also understand what you are saying that there is no specific mentioning of homeschooling in the BOR. However at the time of its writing schooling was done by the churches for the most part and if not it wasw homeschooling that was the norm. So one could actually say there is no precedent for national school system and that that is in fact what is Unconstitutional.

If precedence made something Constitutional, then we'd still have slaves.


View PostBabe Ruth, on 17 February 2013 - 08:03 PM, said:

I find the notion of "explicit right" a bit troubling.  It suggests complete ignorance of the letter and spirit of the Ninth Amendment.

Sure, but neither is the ninth shorthand to create federally enforceable rights.

Edited by Tiggs, 17 February 2013 - 08:09 PM.


#84    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:10 PM

Quote

If precedence made something Constitutional, then we'd still have slaves.

We still have slaves the form has changed not the reality.

Quote

If precedence made something Constitutional, then we'd still have slaves.

slavery was a remnant of the English that got brought to America. Its good it was banned. But it certainly was not what the Civil War was fought over just and end outcome of that War.

Edited by AsteroidX, 17 February 2013 - 08:20 PM.


#85    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:25 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 17 February 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:



Indirectly, yes. Its also in the Declaration of Independence

Can you show me where?

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#86    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:29 PM

This portion of the Declaration of Independence covers many of the hot topics today. And this one is definently covered in it.

Quote

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes

source: http://www.archives....transcript.html

Edited by AsteroidX, 17 February 2013 - 08:30 PM.


#87    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:45 PM

Again, I don't see anything that guarantees this as a rights. I feel that people are so loosely interpreting the constitution and the bill of rights in order to oppose anything the goverent says simply because they are anti-establishment.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#88    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:58 PM

Quote

Again, I don't see anything that guarantees this as a rights. I feel that people are so loosely interpreting the constitution and the bill of rights in order to oppose anything the goverent says simply because they are anti-establishment.

It is actually IMO being strictly interpreted in response to the establishments loose interpretations of it and fondness of wanting to alter it. There is a much larger push in America to adhere to it in a strict fashion.

I dont know how you cannot see " Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" to say anything but dont tread on me. Which includes the ability to choose an apppropriate education for your children. The Federal Government nor State Governments own our children.


#89    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,273 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 17 February 2013 - 09:04 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 17 February 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

Thats an immigration issue then and not a homeschooling one.

So hes going to "threaten" to take away Americans rights because Germans cant home school there kids. Why do we not distance ourselves from the issue and theres no reason for us to alter our laws based on another countries laws.

Exactly.
The family had problems in Germany, so decided to go to the states. This was challenged and eventually the human rights brigade won and the family were given asylum. And they have carried on in the states where they left off in Germany.


#90    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 17 February 2013 - 09:51 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 17 February 2013 - 08:58 PM, said:



It is actually IMO being strictly interpreted in response to the establishments loose interpretations of it and fondness of wanting to alter it. There is a much larger push in America to adhere to it in a strict fashion.

I dont know how you cannot see " Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" to say anything but dont tread on me. Which includes the ability to choose an apppropriate education for your children. The Federal Government nor State Governments own our children.

Strictly interpreted? Well let's see... Strictly speaking, it makes no mention of schooling.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users