Germans get political asylum in the US

[ravdin]

A lot of people around the world are robbed, subjugated, tortured, and even murdered by despotic governments and/or totalitarian religious thugs. So it's a fine thing for a free nation to have a tradition of sheltering political refugees who are facing certain imprisonment or death at home for doing nothing more than speaking their minds. It's because of this principle that I'm especially offended by these people:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100302/us_time/09171196809900

In a perverted twist, a US judge has decided to grant political asylum to this German family because they do not want their children to have a secular education.

I say it's time to send this family back where they came from. Where are the teabaggers when we need them?

 

[I Ratant]

"Your humble masses yearning to be free"...
Is it political persecution when the state declares the parents to be idiots?
As long as HSLDA pays the upkeep, and not we honest secular payers, where's the beef?

 

[ddt]

There was another thread on this a month ago, so I asked the mods to merge them.

And yes, I agree with you that this is over the top. When they want their kids to learn religion, send them to Sunday school. It has no (necessary) place in normal school.

And I note that for the price of their Steinway, they could also have easily afforded a private school in Germany instead of moving.

I think it's also offensive of Yahoo to include a link about East Germany. These parents are from Baden Württemberg, near the French border - definitely West-German.

 

[WildCat]

Is the Stasi after them?

 

[ddt]

Is the Stasi after them?

There's this island in former East Germany where there's still a handful of Stasi officers spying on each other who are unaware the Berlin Wall came down over 20 years ago.

I hear it's the same island where Hitler tried out his first atom bomb.

 

[Ziggurat]

As far as I can tell, the rationale for granting asylum was that they were persecuted for homeschooling their children. Which could apply regardless of the reason the parents wanted to homeschool their children. And it also makes the argument that they could have sent their children to a private school irrelevant. The question is, do parents have a right to homeschool their children? Apparently the government of Germany says no, and the government of the US says yes. I don't see religion having anything to do with the decision to grant asylum. Nor do I have a problem with the US government saying that it's a right.

 

[ddt]

As far as I can tell, the rationale for granting asylum was that they were persecuted for homeschooling their children. Which could apply regardless of the reason the parents wanted to homeschool their children. And it also makes the argument that they could have sent their children to a private school irrelevant. The question is, do parents have a right to homeschool their children? Apparently the government of Germany says no, and the government of the US says yes. I don't see religion having anything to do with the decision to grant asylum. Nor do I have a problem with the US government saying that it's a right.

Yes, religion has to do with it. It's the reason they wanted to homeschool their children. They took issue with "obscene" words in schoolbooks. The German ministry had suggested to them sending their kids to private school, or even to found their own private school - see the other thread. They preferred instead to play the martyr.

I note that the HSLDA is not just a pro-homeschooling organization, but is staunchly Christian. I have the vague impression that most US homeschoolers do so out of religious reasons, and would be perfectly content if they could send their kids to a school that caters their brand of religion.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yes, religion has to do with it. It's the reason they wanted to homeschool their children.

You missed my point. There's no reason to think the US cares why they chose to homeschool their children. And my comment was about the US decision, not the decision of the parents.

They took issue with "obscene" words in schoolbooks.

An atheist could do the same.

The German ministry had suggested to them sending their kids to private school, or even to found their own private school - see the other thread. They preferred instead to play the martyr.

They preferred to homeschool their children. Which means private schools are no remedy for them. As far as I can tell, the US doesn't care why they chose to homeschool, nor do I see any reason the US should care. Our government thinks it's a right, that is enough. My freedom of speech protects my right to say stupid things, the fact that something I say is stupid doesn't make it any less of a violation of my rights to keep me from saying it.

I note that the HSLDA is not just a pro-homeschooling organization, but is staunchly Christian.

I note that the ACLU is not just a pro-first-amendment organization, but is staunchly liberal.

So what? That's got nothing to do with the decision of the US government.

I have the vague impression that most US homeschoolers do so out of religious reasons, and would be perfectly content if they could send their kids to a school that caters their brand of religion.

That too is irrelevant. Most people who say, "Jesus is the son of God and my personal savior" do so out of religious reasons. But freedom of speech protects everyone's right to say that, regardless of why they might do so. If people have the right to home school their children, the reasons they might have for choosing to do so are irrelevant to that right.

 

[Chaos]

An atheist could do the same.

Atheists could also burn people at the stake for having the wrong opinions, or bury a girl alive for talking to boys. Yet, funnily enough, they never do so. Nor do they actually object to "obscene language" to the point of claiming political martyrdom.

 

[Ziggurat]

Atheists could also burn people at the stake for having the wrong opinions, or bury a girl alive for talking to boys. Yet, funnily enough, they never do so. Nor do they actually object to "obscene language" to the point of claiming political martyrdom.

Way to miss the point, Chaos. You can keep harping on religion all you want to, but I note you have remained silent about the German government's position that people should not be permitted to homeschool their children.

 

[Chaos]

Way to miss the point, Chaos. You can keep harping on religion all you want to, but I note you have remained silent about the German government's position that people should not be permitted to homeschool their children.

I am no more in favor of allowing religious people to ignore the laws against homeschooling that I am in favor of their ignoring any other laws.

I don´t know how things are in the US, but here in Germany, you can vote in an election every couple of years, with different parties in them which have different agendas; you even get to pick the one you like most. The ones that get elected get to make/change/abolish laws. The whole thing is called "representative government".

So, it´s not like religious people cannot influence the laws. They can do that. However, they canNOT simple ignore the laws they don´t like.

On the surface, the issue is homeschooling; below the surface, this is - once again - all about religious fanatics putting their faith above the law.

 

[Ziggurat]

I am no more in favor of allowing religious people to ignore the laws against homeschooling that I am in favor of their ignoring any other laws.

Again, you missed my point. The issue is the laws themselves. Are the laws justified? If they are not, then granting asylum was the right thing to do, regardless of the motives of that family.

I don´t know how things are in the US, but here in Germany, you can vote in an election every couple of years, with different parties in them which have different agendas; you even get to pick the one you like most. The ones that get elected get to make/change/abolish laws. The whole thing is called "representative government".

Ever heard the phrase, "tyranny of the majority", Chaos? Does a majority have the right to do anything to you? Surely not. What, then, are the limits? And why do you refuse to even address this issue? I am left to conclude it's because you cannot form an argument. You are happy to stick it to these folks because they're the sort you don't like, doing something you don't approve of. But you can't actually justify it.

 

[I Ratant]

I think the state has a vested interest in the education of its citizens.
Informed citizens make good voters.
If there's a standard for home schooling that home schools must adhere to, then OK, toss in the woo -in addition-.
If home schooling graduates dummies, then home schooling needs reviewing.
I do believe the German method comes from long experience with schooling and the pitfalls of no schooling.. that which has no standards to meet.
My Aero Professor, an antique German, told of the way even the marginally capable in Germany were taught the "times 2" tables to permit them to be functional in commerce.
Our less structured society can apparently permit the less well educated for reasons of freedom of the indivdual, but right now, the state schools aren't shining examples of scholarship, with its "peer promotions" based on time in school, not what has been learned.
A comprehensive test of home schooling looking at the various ways its done and the results would be worthwhile.
Any home-schooled rocket scientists?

 

[Chaos]

Again, you missed my point. The issue is the laws themselves. Are the laws justified? If they are not, then granting asylum was the right thing to do, regardless of the motives of that family.

Of course the law is justified. It is in accord with our constitution. Just because a tiny minority of religious fanatics doesn´t like it, that doesn´t mean it is not justified.

Ever heard the phrase, "tyranny of the majority", Chaos? Does a majority have the right to do anything to you? Surely not. What, then, are the limits? And why do you refuse to even address this issue? I am left to conclude it's because you cannot form an argument. You are happy to stick it to these folks because they're the sort you don't like, doing something you don't approve of. But you can't actually justify it.

Cut the nonsense. You can´t trot out "tyranny of the majority" every time you don´t like something. A crucial part of being part of a society is the willingness to accept decisions you do not like. There are protections for minorities, but you cannot simply cry foul whenever something not covered by these exceptions goes against your wishes.

What should we do? Allow Nazis to homeschool their kids, so they can turn them into goose-stepping racist morons? Allow Muslim extremists to homeschool their kids, so they can turn them into suicide bombers?

And why stop there? Why not legalize child porn, because after all the people who consume such stuff don´t like the laws against it? If "tyranny of the majority" is a legitimate argument, you cannot deny pedophiles the right that you demand for religious fanatics.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Ever heard the phrase, "tyranny of the majority", Chaos? Does a majority have the right to do anything to you? Surely not. What, then, are the limits? And why do you refuse to even address this issue? I am left to conclude it's because you cannot form an argument. You are happy to stick it to these folks because they're the sort you don't like, doing something you don't approve of. But you can't actually justify it.

So what is the limit of what parents should be required to have their children learn? You get the state also interfearing in so called child abuse, when all the parents are doing is disciplining their kids.

 

[Ziggurat]

Of course the law is justified. It is in accord with our constitution.

Being in accord with your constitution makes it legal. That isn't the same thing as being justified.

Cut the nonsense. You can´t trot out "tyranny of the majority" every time you don´t like something.

I'm not trotting it out because I don't like something, Chaos. I'm trotting it out to demonstrate that your "democracy" argument doesn't prove what you think it proves. Don't make false arguments, and I won't have to counter them.

A crucial part of being part of a society is the willingness to accept decisions you do not like.

Up to a point, yes. And if someone cannot tolerate those decisions, well, isn't leaving that society rather an appropriate response? Seems like you should be happy that we took these folks off your hands. And yet, you aren't.

What should we do? Allow Nazis to homeschool their kids, so they can turn them into goose-stepping racist morons?

Do you really think that would be a problem? If so, well, that says something very damning about German society, and I'm sorry to see that you're getting so worked up about Christians when you've got so many Nazis in your midst.

Not to mention, there's more than a little irony in appealing to the dangers of a collectivist authoritarian ideology to argue against allowing individualist actions.

Allow Muslim extremists to homeschool their kids, so they can turn them into suicide bombers?

Parents are generally not the ones who turn muslim children into suicide bombers. And it happens without homeschooling, so I see little reason to think homeschooling would change the problem.

If "tyranny of the majority" is a legitimate argument, you cannot deny pedophiles the right that you demand for religious fanatics.

You're clueless, Chaos. "tyranny of the majority" is a valid argument, it's just not an absolute one. And unlike your earlier attempts to appeal to democracy, I never claimed it was either. Of course there's a balance between personal rights and the boundaries society can impose. But you have yet to form an effective argument demonstrating why homeschooling falls on one side of the line and not the other. Pointing out that some things fall on one side doesn't mean this thing does. And your references to Nazis and muslim suicide bombers are not exactly very convincing either.

 

[Alt+F4]

What should we do? Allow Nazis to homeschool their kids, so they can turn them into goose-stepping racist morons? Allow Muslim extremists to homeschool their kids, so they can turn them into suicide bombers?

We already allow this, in the U.S. at least. When children are home schooled we really don't know what they are being taught. Parents have every right to indoctrinate their children into whatever their political or religious leanings are. Just don't ask my tax dollars to pay for it in a public school.

 

[Architect]

In Scotland, parents are permitted to home school however the law is quite clear; if the local education authority has reason to believe that the education provided is not sufficient for his (or her) needs then they have a duty to intervene. The Scottish Government recommends that there be an annual review of the education provided, although this is not a legal obligation.

This is not, of course, just about a parent's right to educate their children in whatever way they see fit but rather to ensure that the child gets an education adequate to allow them to survive/get employment/make the most of themselves. It seems to me that those who see the parents as having an unfettered right to do what they want rather overlook this aspect.

 

[Alt+F4]

This is not, of course, just about a parent's right to educate their children in whatever way they see fit but rather to ensure that the child gets an education adequate to allow them to survive/get employment/make the most of themselves. It seems to me that those who see the parents as having an unfettered right to do what they want rather overlook this aspect.

The two are not mutally exclusive. Home schooled kids generally do well on standardized tests. Just because Johnny knows his math and science doesn't mean he isn't also getting a whopping dose of Mormon fundamentalism or Nazism on a daily basis.

 

[Architect]

And under those circumstances my understanding is that the Scottish educational system would not, in fact, be entitled to intervene. If, however, you were to set up a school espousing such values then the Scottish Government would most certainly come to pay you a visit.