When the School House Is Your House…
The coronavirus has made life miserable for plenty of people — but for the extreme Left, it’s a nightmare.
The coronavirus has made life miserable for plenty of people — but for the extreme Left, it’s a nightmare. For the first time in recent memory, America’s children are learning at home, beyond the public schools’ grasp. Amazingly, this outbreak, for all of its devastation, has managed to do what no one else could: free some kids from the daily drumbeat of liberal indoctrination. Suddenly, parents are the ones managing their children’s schooling — and there’s nothing more dangerous to the Left’s long-term agenda than parents finding out what that agenda consists of.
Maybe that’s why the attacks on homeschooling, strange and absurd as they’ve been, have started to hit with more intensity. To a lot of people, it seemed odd that Harvard’s Elizabeth Bartholet would pick now to declare war on one of the most successful education movements in the country before COVID-19: homeschooling. But with the majority of parents being thrust into their kids’ day-to-day learning, liberals must have sensed the threat. For one, the parents who’ve become “accidental homeschoolers” might realize they like the flexibility it offers. Secondly, even if their kids are just distance learning from home, these moms and dads are seeing firsthand what their children are being taught. And for extremists, who thrive on secrecy to push their radical gender, sexual, anti-Christian agendas, that’s a problem.
Homeschooling has always been a thorn in the liberals’ side. It takes away their access to kids and their natural recruiting grounds: the public classroom. So now, as their competition gets a boost from the virus, Bartholet and company are trying to throw shade at anyone considering it by writing an out-of-touch diatribe about how “dangerous” it is for parents to have “control” over their children. And frankly, that should offend every mom and dad — whether they homeschool or not. It arrogantly implies that the state knows how to raise their kids better than they do. But the problem is, children don’t belong to the state. They belong to parents. And it’s their right and responsibility to rear them as they see fit.
Bartholet doesn’t see it that way. Teaching kids at home, she argues, deprives them of a “meaningful education.” But what she really means is that it deprives them of the Left’s version of meaningful. A version that scorns biology, despises religion, rejects gender, embraces deviance, stifles speech, and encourages promiscuity. “There was a time,” FRC’s Cathy Ruse points out, “when we could say that the culture had shared values.” Back then, parents could trust the public schools to reinforce those values — or at least not undermine the ones they’re instilling at home. “But we’re not there anymore,” she laments. Now, it’s become a competition of whose values are going to prevail. And the virus is giving parents a real opportunity, Cathy says, to look at education differently, to enjoy being with their kids, and to see the benefits of in-home learning.
Which is why, to the Left’s dismay, so many people have come out swinging against Bartholet’s unsubstantiated tirade. Melba Pearson, a graduate of Harvard and a homeschooler through high school, was disgusted that her alma mater would suggest that the government, “already so inefficient and inadequate in so many areas… has more of a right to educate, care for, and control your children than you, their parents, do.” It’s an attack, she insists, “on the fundamental rights and freedoms that make our country (and until recently, institutions such as Harvard) what they are.”
Meanwhile, if liberals are threatened by anything, it should be homeschoolers’ success. They “consistently,” Melba points out, “test approximately 30 percent higher than the national public-school average in all subjects tested. [And they] consistently demonstrate higher high school GPAs, higher SAT/ACT scores, and higher first year college GPAs.” How do government schools counter? With “higher levels of abuse, bullying, suicide, and drop-out rates in children and young adults…”
That’s why, contrary to what the media would have you believe, homeschooling is such a diverse movement. “You’ve got people on the Left [and] the Right who homeschool for many reasons,” Mike Donnelly pointed out on “Washington Watch.” “They have children with special needs. They want their children to be able to pursue their own interests. They’re not happy with the state of the public schools [or its] content…” This whole crisis is opening up a whole new world to others who never considered it. And, as Mike said, “I think a lot of people, a year from now, are going to look back on this pandemic, and they’re going to point [it] as a time when they realized that homeschooling is [a good option]. We like having our kids at home. We like this relationship. We [like the] flexibility…”
As a family who’s homeschooled all five children, I can tell you that it’s the most challenging and rewarding thing you can do as parents. Looking back on it, my wife and I have never regretted our choice, because of the relationships we built with our kids and the open communication we enjoy — even now, as they embark on their own lives and careers. If you want to explore this as a more permanent option, check out Home School Legal Defense Association’s new website, MomPossible.org. It’ll help you sort through options that are out there and find ways to cope with these sudden changes. Or, if you need some content for the here and now, try our educational resources. Either way, take some time to pray about whether homeschooling is an option for your family. You won’t regret it.
Originally published here.
Virus Crackdowns Par for the Courts
If you ask most protestors in the states, it’s the hypocrisy that’s bothering them — not the commonsense rules. In places like Washington State, columnists raged at the double standards of governors like Jay Inslee (D), whose orders insist, “Private home construction must stop, but Sound Transit construction can continue. Private landscapers are out of work, but [counties] can still dispatch crews to trim grass in closed parks…” In Michigan, you can’t buy flower seeds, but you can buy weed. And in Kansas, families can drive-through a Sonic, but not parking lot church service.
“Public safety is important,” Alliance Defending Freedom’s (ADF) Tyson Langhofer agreed, “but so is following the Constitution.” And when local officials use the virus crisis to overreach, it’s time to push back. That’s exactly what people are doing across Mississippi, Kansas, California, North Carolina, and other states where government is abusing power to crack down on Christians and conservatives.
ADF’s Mike Farris, who’s been keeping busy with the flood of complaints from pastors and pro-lifers, says the problems are popping up all over the country. “But it’s really gratifying to see the courts are understanding the challenges… We’re looking for equal treatment and common sense. And when either of those things are violated, then we’ll come to take you to task.”
The reality is, these churches aren’t asking for special treatment. Like most Americans, they support the CDC guidelines. They want to keep the community safe. And as long as everybody plays by the same rules, congregations are happy to adapt. They’ll think and act outside the box. But if local officials are going to single out Christians to apply tighter restrictions just to them, then we have a problem. The same goes for ministries or nonprofits.
David Benham’s group, Cities4Life, was created to provide counseling and assistance outside of the abortion clinics in Charlotte, North Carolina. Two weeks ago, despite abiding by all of the rules and social distancing guidelines, he and some of his volunteers were arrested. Not because they’d violated any health codes, but because the city didn’t like what they were doing there. Again, Mike insisted, it’s the hypocrisy. “Other people can walk up and down the same sidewalks. No problem… The only thing that [was different for David’s group] is their purpose for being there. And that’s not a constitutionally valid reason for making a distinction. And so, again, they’re singling out people who are there because their religious faith compels them to try to save these babies. [But] if it’s lawful to be on the sidewalk for any purpose, then it’s lawful to be on that sidewalk for the purposes that they want to.”
ADF has been trying to work with Charlotte officials to get the city to relent. But so far, they’re only digging in — to their own detriment, Mike warns. Any pretense they had for the arrest won’t stand up in the civil suit that’s been filed. “Once we… get to the judge… I’m hoping for and expect success.”
One reason he’s so confident? The Trump administration. Not only has the president leveled the playing field in the courts with his nominations, but the Justice Department has been actively fighting these cases alongside the victims and churches. They’ve intervened in these new lawsuits, insisting “religious freedom is important and being violated… by local actors and local governments. So we really appreciate the Trump administration and [Attorney] General William Barr, in particular, for their courageous stand.”
Originally published here.
Israel: Duel Leadership or Dual Leadership?
In America, the words “unified government” probably sound like an oxymoron. But in Israel, where a new deal brings rival parties together to lead the county, it’s more than a grand political experiment. It’s the new reality.
After three elections in which no one won, suddenly, everyone has. In an agreement struck Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Benny Gantz have agreed to take turns at the helm of the Israeli government. Spurred on in part by the coronavirus emergency, the two sides are determined to find a functional leadership balance during a crisis that’s rocked everyone — including the Middle East. That means that, for at least six months, everyone’s focus will be the virus. Nothing outside of the outbreak will be debated or enacted without agreement from both sides.
In the meantime, they’ll share power. For the first half of the 36-month period, Netanyahu will continue as prime minister, while Gantz is sworn in as defense minister. A year and a half later, Gantz will take over the reins. The hope is, CBN’s Chris Mitchell told me from Jerusalem, it’ll be a “stable government” for at least three years.
The experience will be an interesting one for the country, who, under Netanyahu, had a primarily right-of-center government. Some are worried, Chris explained, that Netanyahu made too many concessions to Gantz in the agreement. But, he went on, “one major point for right-wing supporters will be the fact that they will vote on annexation of parts of Judea and Samaria — also known as the West Bank — sometime in July. And that has been a major contention for many of the right-wing parties here… that they would be taking advantage of the Trump peace plan [which] really does give Israel sort of a green light, at least a vote, on that annexation…”
But these were all compromises that the parties were willing to make. The Israelis, Chris agreed, didn’t want a fourth unresolved election after all the suffering they’ve gone through. “Just like the U.S., Israel has been on lockdown for several weeks… [And] the Israelis were very frustrated with their political leaders that were unable, at least until today, to come up with some sort of a national emergency government. And I think one of the points to be made is that the government is agreeing for the next six months there will be no major legislation. The only thing they’ll be focusing on is specifically the coronavirus.”
So for now, at least, there’s relief. The last thing any country wants in a state of emergency is more uncertainty. And, “it’s also kind of poignant as well,” Chris said, since this is Holocaust Remembrance Day in Israel. “And next week will be Israel’s Independence Day. So it’s a very important part of the Jewish calendar, the Hebrew calendar, and the Israeli calendar here to have this unity government finally come together.”
Originally published here.
This is a publication of the Family Research Council. Mr. Perkins is president of FRC.
