[LEC23]

If you are a homeschooler, your aim is to educate them within their best interests, right? However under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, specifically, Articles 13, 14 and 15, your right to Homeschool your child could be in danger.

Even though the US has not ratified this, but being a leading member of the United Nations, how long will it be before the United States are made to comply with this Convention, in order to remain a member of the United Nations and made to comply with this international law?

Let us look at what the implications on you, the homeschooler will be if and when the US do ratify this Convention.

Under Article 13 you could be subject to prosecution if your child/ren interact with material that you deem that is unacceptable. So, you would have to then teach them and provide them with books and other learning material, which you personally deem unfit and morally unethically, objectionable and repulsive because if you didn't you would be subject to prosecution.

Under Article 14 children are guaranteed freedom of thought, conscience and religion. So, if you are an active single faith homeschooler and you believe in teaching your child within your religious believes, you could be prosecuted especially if your religion does not acknowledge some of the beliefs of other religions eg Christanities belief in that Jesus was the son of God and that of many other faiths that he was not the Son of God, but only a Prophet and that the Son of God has yet to come.

Under Article 15 children have the right to freedom of association. This in my opinion is by far the biggest threat to homeschoolers rights. By homeschooling, you do not want your child associating with drug dealers, gang members and those that practice anti-social behaviour, bullying or violence; that may be educated within the public school system; but by homeschooling, you would be prosecuted for not giving your child the opportunity to associate with them.

You as a parent would then have to agree to school your child "respecting the respect (sic)." Which is directly inspired by this Convention. This statement means that if 2 or more government inspectors, that you had to allow into your home, who then intimidate, interrogate and then report negatively on your homeschooling; then the state would have the right to force your child to attend a public school.

In other words your parental autonomy over homeschooling, even if it was in the best interests of your child and that you believed that the public school system was totally inadequate to meet the needs and safety of your child, would end.

Your local school board, through your state and national governments, would have the right to impose its own educational agenda, under the "respecting the respect" which will be designed to ensure that no parent has the opportunity to object or question its opinions. In other words the definition of "respecting the respect", is that parents will not be able to legally - directly or indirectly - or morally, object against a local or national educational body's or their appointed agents or representatives decisions or opinions concerning the education of your child. If you do, you will be in breach of the law and be prosecuted. In other words effectively eliminating homeschooling as a parental educational option and right.

Campaign now by letter, emails etc to your local and national government representatives for the fundemental rights of parents in the democratic United States to have the choice to home educate your child/ren in your own values.

USE YOUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE TO HOMESCHOOL NOW OR LOSE IT!

[ahermitt]

I have been hearing alot about this lately, I will surely keep my eye on it.

[wishbonedawn]

This is old but I didn't want to leave the post unchallenged. I've been seeing it knocking around the internet and it seems to me like fearmongering by certain groups who have political beefs against the UN.

Even though the US has not ratified this, but being a leading member of the United Nations, how long will it be before the United States are made to comply with this Convention, in order to remain a member of the United Nations and made to comply with this international law?

First, the US has not ratified this so the US is not bound by this. At all. In any way.

Second, the US is indeed a leading member of the UN. It's one of 5 countries that are permanent members the Security Council and those 5 members each hold veto power. It's a political impossibility for the US to be "made" to conform to the convention (esp. one it hasn't signed) when such a measure would be subject to the US's power to veto. And no change can be made to alter that that the US couldn't, again, veto.

Regardless, here's a link to the convention and I've posted the articles in question. Note the highlighted section in Article 14.

Article 13
1. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice.

2. The exercise of this right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; or

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

Article 14
1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

Article 15
1. States Parties recognize the rights of the child to freedom of association and to freedom of peaceful assembly.

2. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of these rights other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Under Article 13 you could be subject to prosecution if your child/ren interact with material that you deem that is unacceptable. So, you would have to then teach them and provide them with books and other learning material, which you personally deem unfit and morally unethically, objectionable and repulsive because if you didn't you would be subject to prosecution.

That's simply not so.
See Article 13, 2-a,b.

Under Article 14 children are guaranteed freedom of thought, conscience and religion. So, if you are an active single faith homeschooler and you believe in teaching your child within your religious believes, you could be prosecuted especially if your religion does not acknowledge some of the beliefs of other religions eg Christanities belief in that Jesus was the son of God and that of many other faiths that he was not the Son of God, but only a Prophet and that the Son of God has yet to come.

No. See Article 14, 2.

Under Article 15 children have the right to freedom of association. This in my opinion is by far the biggest threat to homeschoolers rights. By homeschooling, you do not want your child associating with drug dealers, gang members and those that practice anti-social behaviour, bullying or violence; that may be educated within the public school system; but by homeschooling, you would be prosecuted for not giving your child the opportunity to associate with them.

Do you deny you child the freedom to associate with others by homeschooling? Do you not think the freedom to homeschool might be confirmed by this article? For example, a homeschooled child's right to associate with a homeschool community or certain religious community?

You as a parent would then have to agree to school your child "respecting the respect (sic)." Which is directly inspired by this Convention. This statement means that if 2 or more government inspectors, that you had to allow into your home, who then intimidate, interrogate and then report negatively on your homeschooling; then the state would have the right to force your child to attend a public school.

This is an arguments of assumptions builts on assumptions. There is no direct line of reasoning, or none that I can see, from what the convention says to your conclusion.

In other words your parental autonomy over homeschooling, even if it was in the best interests of your child and that you believed that the public school system was totally inadequate to meet the needs and safety of your child, would end.

Not so. Again, read Article 14, 2.

Your local school board, through your state and national governments, would have the right to impose its own educational agenda, under the "respecting the respect" which will be designed to ensure that no parent has the opportunity to object or question its opinions. In other words the definition of "respecting the respect", is that parents will not be able to legally - directly or indirectly - or morally, object against a local or national educational body's or their appointed agents or representatives decisions or opinions concerning the education of your child. If you do, you will be in breach of the law and be prosecuted. In other words effectively eliminating homeschooling as a parental educational option and right.

I'm sorry but this a fantastic conjecture based on a biased reading of the convention and a misunderstanding of how the UN works.

Campaign now by letter, emails etc to your local and national government representatives for the fundemental rights of parents in the democratic United States to have the choice to home educate your child/ren in your own values.

It will make no difference. The threat this campaign claims exists, is a phantom. If I write to my political representatives and demand that they slay the dragon that's been eating my pet poodles, it will make no difference because neither the dragons nor the poodles nor the slaying exist. They will read my letter, be confused or amused, and toss it out.

[ahermitt]

wishbonedawn, arguement noted... thanks

[LEC23]

Originally Posted by wishbonedawn

This is old but I didn't want to leave the post unchallenged. I've been seeing it knocking around the internet and it seems to me like fearmongering by certain groups who have political beefs against the UN.

MY REPLY

Over the past few weeks, I have been extremely busy, helping parents who have contacted me and who want to homeschool their children, but are being pressed and harassed by the authorities to send them into the public school system, which the parents feel is a detriment to their own children, then I read this posting.
I felt so angry and insulted by this post, I felt I must reply. This post may be old but the subject matter is ongoing in the United States and throughout Europe. Let me also say that I do not like being accused of being a member of anything without being asked first. I am not a member of any groups, political or otherwise and I am certainly not fearmongering and YES I do have a political beef with ANY group that erodes parental equality and choice of how they choose to educate their child in their children's best interests, whether it be the US, UK, UN, EU etc. and will continue to do so.

First, the US has not ratified this so the US is not bound by this. At all. In any way.

MY REPLY

The US may not have ratified this and is not bound by it in any way, so in that case why do they actively discriminate in some states against homeschooled children? Re: homeschooled children being banned from participating in public-school sports etc...

Second, the US is indeed a leading member of the UN. It's one of 5 countries that are permanent members the Security Council and those 5 members each hold veto power. It's a political impossibility for the US to be "made" to conform to the convention (esp. one it hasn't signed) when such a measure would be subject to the US's power to veto. And no change can be made to alter that that the US couldn't, again, veto.

MY REPLY

I am quite aware of the 5 countries that are permanent members of the UN Security Council and that each holds a veto, however it is not impossible for the US to be made to conform, they could be made to conform indirectly through internal political, media and bureaucratic pressure.

Regardless, here's a link to the convention and I've posted the articles in question. Note the highlighted section in Article 14.

Article 13
1. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice.

2. The exercise of this right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; or

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

Article 14
1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

Article 15
1. States Parties recognize the rights of the child to freedom of association and to freedom of peaceful assembly.

2. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of these rights other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

That's simply not so.
See Article 13, 2-a,b.

MY REPLY

In what way is it not so? What is your reasoning and clarification?

No. See Article 14, 2.

MY REPLY

In what way No? Please clarify.

Do you deny you child the freedom to associate with others by homeschooling? Do you not think the freedom to homeschool might be confirmed by this article? For example, a homeschooled child's right to associate with a homeschool community or certain religious community?

MY REPLY

I also find this paragraph particularly insulting and I would not normally even justify it with a reply. You do not even know me and how I homeschooled my son and if you had even read the threads I have made on homeschooling, you would have found out that my son has had a very broad knowledge and skill intergration into many different forms of people, religions and cultures, including Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Judism, Buddism, Christianity, and my son and I have many good friends around the world, who we regularly communicate with from different races, Afro-Caribbean, Afro-American, Aboriginal, Maori , Black South-African, Chineese, Taiwaneese, Japaneese, US citizens and European. Can you say the same?

This is an arguments of assumptions builts on assumptions. There is no direct line of reasoning, or none that I can see, from what the convention says to your conclusion.

MY REPLY

This is certainly not arguments or assumptions built on assumptions. The threat to parental choice in education in the best interests of their child is real, as is the discrimination of home-schooled children and is occuring now and not just in the United States. Their is a direct line of reasoning from what the convention says to my conclusion, I suggest that you read the HSDLA website and many of the articles available on the Web of the parents that are been harassed and persecuted for deciding to exercise their right to choose to homeschool their children, that they believe is in the best interests of their children.

Not so. Again, read Article 14, 2.

I'm sorry but this a fantastic conjecture based on a biased reading of the convention and a misunderstanding of how the UN works.

MY REPLY

Once again, I think that this is a very arrogant presumption, relaying that this is just conjecture and biased reading on my part and that the threat is not real and does not exist and I certainly have a perfect understanding of how the UN works. Again an arrogant presumption, without even knowing me, who I am or what skills, knowledge and experience I have to post this line of reasoning.

It will make no difference. The threat this campaign claims exists, is a phantom. If I write to my political representatives and demand that they slay the dragon that's been eating my pet poodles, it will make no difference because neither the dragons nor the poodles nor the slaying exist. They will read my letter, be confused or amused, and toss it out.

MY REPLY

Again arrogant presumption and I am afraid a person living with their head in the sand on the issue. By claiming that this campaign is a phantom, is claiming that threat to homeschooling, homeschoolers and the eroding or parental choice on how their child is educated - in the child's best interest - and the discrimination of homeschooled children does not exist, is wrong.
However, I do believe in democracy and that of the democratic process and that of political pressure campaigning to obtain what is right and just. If you believe that your letter on such an issue would be read, your representative confused, amused and toss it out, perhaps you may have worded it wrong, or cast your vote for the wrong representative and explain it better.

[LEC23]

Originally Posted by ahermitt

wishbonedawn, arguement noted... thanks

Just to let you know that I have replied to wishbonedawn's posting on the article, as I felt it totally out of order and personally insulting.

Hope you are well.

[PamalaLauren]

I don't know, dawn presented more information than you have and in a very logical and respectful manner. She didn't accuse you of anything, rather said that it's spread by fearmongering of others. Anyhow I've read the articles over and over again and don't understand how you came to your conclusions based on teh articles alone.

[ahermitt]

In defense of LEC23,we that homeshcool in the United States have to remember that the world is bigger than ourselves... some real atrocities are going on outside our country that LEC23 encounters on a daily basis... This threat is very real to her, and when it comes to potential problems in the United States, I would never say never.
thanks for reading.

[mcmama]

Yes, it is true, we should be aware that homeschooling issues vary from country to country. It sounds as though LEC23 is coping with a restrictive situation which many homeschooling parents elsewhere would find intolerable.

Wishbonedawn raised some good points concerning the United Nations role and LEC23 answered them. An argument or disagreement on this forum is not an "arrogant presumption", and just because someone may not have all the facts of a particular situation or agree with your position does not mean they have their head in the sand. Please everyone watch your tone.

Although this is not in the debate forum, please refer to the guidelines for debates in a discussion such as this. The guidelines are here: http://forums.families.com/guideline...debates,t58838

[wishbonedawn]

Originally Posted by LEC23

MY REPLY

I felt so angry and insulted by this post, I felt I must reply. This post may be old but the subject matter is ongoing in the United States and throughout Europe. Let me also say that I do not like being accused of being a member of anything without being asked first. I am not a member of any groups, political or otherwise and I am certainly not fearmongering and YES I do have a political beef with ANY group that erodes parental equality and choice of how they choose to educate their child in their children's best interests, whether it be the US, UK, UN, EU etc. and will continue to do so.

I have to apologize. My intent was not to target you but the information you posted which has been circulating on the internet largely unchallenged. When I made my comments about fear-mongering and political agendas I was reffering to those who were originally responsible for the misinformation in the letter. Michael Farris, cofounder of the Home School Legal Defense Association for instance seems a probable source from what I've read.

The US may not have ratified this and is not bound by it in any way, so in that case why do they actively discriminate in some states against homeschooled children? Re: homeschooled children being banned from participating in public-school sports etc...

I'm not denying that there are states with restrictive legislation but to draw a line from that to the UN demands a trail of evidence and reason that hasn't been presented. The US considered homeschooling illeagal long before there even was a UN.

I am quite aware of the 5 countries that are permanent members of the UN Security Council and that each holds a veto, however it is not impossible for the US to be made to conform, they could be made to conform indirectly through internal political, media and bureaucratic pressure.

Considering past examples like Kyoto, handgun and landmine treaties and Iraq where the US has opposed the popular opinion and faced enourmous pressure and still done it's own thing, I don't think that's a likely at all.

MY REPLY

I also find this paragraph particularly insulting and I would not normally even justify it with a reply. You do not even know me and how I homeschooled my son and if you had even read the threads I have made on homeschooling, you would have found out that my son has had a very broad knowledge and skill intergration into many different forms of people, religions and cultures, including Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Judism, Buddism, Christianity, and my son and I have many good friends around the world, who we regularly communicate with from different races, Afro-Caribbean, Afro-American, Aboriginal, Maori , Black South-African, Chineese, Taiwaneese, Japaneese, US citizens and European. Can you say the same?

I did not mean to imply anything personal. My questions on how the article might also confirm a child's right to homeschool were general ones, asking your opinion on how it might be interpreted in a different way.

This is certainly not arguments or assumptions built on assumptions. The threat to parental choice in education in the best interests of their child is real, as is the discrimination of home-schooled children and is occuring now and not just in the United States. Their is a direct line of reasoning from what the convention says to my conclusion, I suggest that you read the HSDLA website and many of the articles available on the Web of the parents that are been harassed and persecuted for deciding to exercise their right to choose to homeschool their children, that they believe is in the best interests of their children.

I am not arguing that homeschoolers don't face obstacles. I am arguing that those obstacles don't, and can't come from the UN.

Once again, I think that this is a very arrogant presumption, relaying that this is just conjecture and biased reading on my part and that the threat is not real and does not exist and I certainly have a perfect understanding of how the UN works. Again an arrogant presumption, without even knowing me, who I am or what skills, knowledge and experience I have to post this line of reasoning.

Of course I know nothing about you which means I'm left simply with your post to reply to. If I'm challenging you on something in your post please don't assume I mean anything personal about it. This is simply a debate.

[b]Again arrogant presumption and I am afraid a person living with their head in the sand on the issue. By claiming that this campaign is a phantom, is claiming that threat to homeschooling, homeschoolers and the eroding or parental choice on how their child is educated - in the child's best interest - and the discrimination of homeschooled children does not exist, is wrong.

That's simply not so. I siad nothing about pressures and legislation from inside the US that threaten homeschooling and was simply addressing the claim that the UN could somehow threaten US homeschooling.

I feel there are real dangers to homeschooling freedoms out there. I feel concentrating on this issue distracts from those real dangers and promotes a fear and mistrust of international agencies. I feel most of all, that our best defense as homeschoolers against these dangers and fear is a critical and questioning spirit towards the information that's directed at us, whoever and where ever it comes from.

Again, I apologize for the tone of my argument. It was not meant to be a personal attack but a rebuttal of what was presented in your post. I think a debate on this subject would be really interesting if you'd be willing as there's probably more to be said on both sides of this. If not, no problem.