Believe it or not, I agree with you.

Well the court isn't going after the Mom on their own, and even if the father isn't the custodial parent he does still have rights on how his children are raised. I think there are more matters here than just the child is too religious, as with anything in the media the whole story is never represented.

Soley on the facts here – too grey to figure out which side is right.

If the mother was a pagan would you be defending her still?

There's so little info in that news story that it's impossible to tell what's really going on. I look forward to hearing more and will reserve judgement till I do.

See, I can be right every once in a while.

Granted there's still a lot that we don't know, but regardless of the religious issues here I don't think the state should have the right to pull a kid from homeschool so long as they're meeting all educational criteria. And yes, I would support her regardless of her religious/philosophical beliefs.

Also, I'm sure it's hard on the father's side of the fence and divorce is a messy business. Hopefully he's looking out for his daughter and there's no pettiness in his attempts to get her in to PS (or mom's attempts to keep her in).

Oh what fun is reserving judgment?

I hate be the one to inform the judge, but one will re-evaluate their system of belief regardless of how rigidly they are homeschooled. His reasoning in that paragraph is fallacious in assuming that public school's purpose is to promote different systems of belief. He also assumes that the state has a purient intrest in doing so without showing why. Nothing I have read about the public school system indicates one of its missions is to expose children to different religious or areligious viewpoints; only to educate them in the sciences and the arts. If the homeschooling situation is deficient in some way, then the rigidity of the girl's belief system is irrelevant.

<quote>His reasoning in that paragraph is fallacious in assuming that public school's purpose is to promote different systems of belief.</quote>

But the judge doesn't say that it's the purpose of public education to promote different belief systems; he only says “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 other words, that exposure to more viewpoints (which would happen at a public school) would be helpful in a time where she has to sort her beliefs out. This is saying that that's what happens, not that that it's the mission of the school, or even that the school intends it.

<quote>one will re-evaluate their system of belief regardless of how rigidly they are homeschooled.</quote>

I also find this to be a very questionable assumption that should be backed up. If the mother had bad intentions, isolating a child and giving her a specific education seems an easy way to indoctrinate her.

That being said, I can't see that the case for that has been made at all, given what we've seen. Saying that a 10-year-old doesn't appears to have a rigid belief system doesn't prove anything, certainly not beyond a reasonable doubt. I'm inclined to side with Scott here.

I'm hoping the father has the child's best interest at heart, and perhaps the homeschooling may be meeting the minimum requirements set by the state, but not his requirements. I know I have higher expectations of education than I could provide by homeschooling my kids which is why mine go to public school, they get a better education there than my wife or I can provide at home.

I read this story a few days ago and just knew it'd end up here. It's like the case was tailor-made to provide you with content, Scott.

The issue is between the mother and father and how their desires for their daughter's education. I think the judge made a mistake to consider the girl's religiosity at all. The focus should of been on her socialization shortcomings.

I also find this to be a very questionable assumption that should be backed up.

I think it's a reasonable assumption under most circumstances, still I'd like to see him back it up too.

And you didn't tell me about it? Shame, shame!

“The focus should of been on her socialization shortcomings”

If she had any… Which is I think what you meant.

You'd be suprised at how (relatively speaking) easy it is to provide your child with a good quality education. Yes it's hard work, much harder than simply the act of sending them to school, and not much harder than be an active and dedicated parent of a child attending public school, but doable provided one parent can stay at home.

It strikes me though and this is based solely on what I read in the linked articles that this is more about dad not liking mom's choice on philosophical/religious grounds.

I had full confidence you'd find it.

The article I read indicated she had a serious disability dealing with people of differing opinion. I was going off of what was reported.

Clearly, both parents have a right to determine the education of the child, not just the one who bears the custodial responsibilities. Of course, this hinges on the father being as involved as possible with the child, not behind on child support and not using this simply as a way to get back at the wife.

I also think that there is a massive difference between the girl with (A) only a rigid religious upbringing vs. (B) an upbringing balanced with a variety of influences and options. I'm not implying the court ruling will guarantee a balance, or that there is a specific balance the world can agree on. But too much of anything is harmful.

There is a sad point I've seen reached in too many people where they have sacrificed being genuine human beings in favor of coating everything with their faith. The traditional idea of “rigid” Christian homeschooling makes this all the worse. Where's the line drawn between rasising one's child the way that seems right and forcing faith on them so that wen all else fails, fear will keep them in line when they finally, regrettably are beyond direct control?

How prepared can you be to go into the world and spread the message when you only speak a VERY specific dialect of an already tough “language”? Being liberal with ones socializing isn't sinful. It's Christ-like!

(Scott, I'm not firing directly at you. I don't believe you are one of these absolutist, “rigid” types.)

Yes, I know, I'm late to the party. Again. It is interesting that most of the comments have valid points.

Although I'm really not saying anything new, I really don't think this should have anything to do with the religion of the person in question. It seems that the state has an approved homeschool provision. The majority of people (all?) that homeschool their kids do so because they find some fault with the public system. Many do try to still keeps their kids in social activities and supplement with sports and musical activities outside the home.

Far from crusading for or against, I'm surprised the state would set this kind of precedence. Again, if the mom is the custodial parent, she does get first right, regardless of the dad's wishes (I know, I'm a noncustodial parent). The argument the state is using could be used with almost any homeschooled child, because in some way, shape or form someone would argue that they weren't being short changed somehow.

Yes, I know, I'm late to the party. Again. It is interesting that most of the comments have valid points.

Although I'm really not saying anything new, I really don't think this should have anything to do with the religion of the person in question. It seems that the state has an approved homeschool provision. The majority of people (all?) that homeschool their kids do so because they find some fault with the public system. Many do try to still keeps their kids in social activities and supplement with sports and musical activities outside the home.

Far from crusading for or against, I'm surprised the state would set this kind of precedence. Again, if the mom is the custodial parent, she does get first right, regardless of the dad's wishes (I know, I'm a noncustodial parent). The argument the state is using could be used with almost any homeschooled child, because in some way, shape or form someone would argue that they weren't being short changed somehow.