There are three points that can be made here. First, this just goes to show once again, that if you give the government a foot, it will take your whole house. Many times, people think that government can help fix their individual little problem, so seek assistance from the government. The government, always willing to assert more control over its citizenry, happily obliges by passing a law that restricts your freedom. Then, a few years later, they need to pass a new law to restrict your freedom a little more because the first law didn't catch all cases of whatever it was you were seeking protection from. For those who don't understand this principle, I first urge you to read "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie" (yes, I know this is a children's book, but it clearly illustrates this principle). After reading the book, do some research on the history of safety codes. Safety codes are a great idea, until you try to get a permit down at city hall to do some work on your house... You also see this principle in Income Taxes. When the 16th Amendment was passed it only affected the top 1% of the population, was not higher than 7%, and could be reported on a postcard. 90 years later we have a tax code so complex that even the Government can't give you the right answers to your questions, is contradictory in places, and requires more paperwork than to file than it took to engineer a moon launch.
Secondly, a very scary prospect is that many "liberals" (they are actually socialist, classic liberalism is about personal freedom and responsibility) in our country look at Canada as a model of how government should be run. In the liberal mindset, the First Amendment right of freedom of religion is severely limited. They believe you are free to keep your religion only to yourself. Many Christians feel that they don't have to worry about the government stepping on their right to freedom of religion. However, if we look at how second amendment has been eroded, and compare that to current trends (Ten Commandments controversy, pro-life demonstrators having to play by a different set of rules when demonstrating, the Pledge of Allegiance controversy, etc...), we can see a clear attack on the expression of Christianity and Christian values.
Finally, while a big supporter of school vouchers, I see the government using school vouchers to remove religious materials from private Christian schools and enforce the same kind of draconian decrees on home schoolers here in the US. In other words, by letting government get involved in education, it will lead us to the same thing.
In conclusion, it is my belief that each parent is responsible for his own child's education and that can take shape in many forms. Some children need private schools, some need home schooling...some may even thrive in certain public schools (I was educated in mainly DOD schools that were government funded). However, no matter the form of the education, the content and manner of the education lies solely with the parents, not some government official. The government can not control my mind or my thoughts, however, if it can control my education and world-view at an early age (universal day-care, anyone??) then it can control how I view government later on. As my favorite radio talk-show host, Neal Boortz, says,
Catholic schools can be expected to teach their students that Catholicism is good. Jewish private schools are going to sing the praises of Judaism. Christian schools will teach the children that Jesus is really cool. Government schools? Government schools will promote what? Government!
No comments:
Post a Comment