This is a very very disturbing ruling, in my opinion. As most of you know, I am a homeschooler and I am adamant about homeschooling and know exactly why I DO homeschool
A NH court has ordered this child to go to public school because
a)she's too rigid in her Christian beliefs
b) she lacks "youthful characteristics"
c) she needed to be in group learning situations for problem solving skills.
Well, there are some seriously skewed things going on here.
First of all, is there something wrong with being a strong believer in your religion of choice? I thought that was called freedom on religion that is one of our consitutional rights! Would they have done the same if her religion of choice was something other than Christianity?? I wonder...
Secondly - lacking youthful characteristics - exactly WHAT does that mean? If that means that she is respectful, obedient, etc and not mouthing off or misbehaving, how is this a problem? I'm not sure what exactly they meant, but many homeschool children have a different set of standards. Certainly not all, but in my area, it's a big difference.
Third - the child was ALREADY attending public school for some activities. She was IN classroom situations regularly, so their whole load of garbage about needing to be in group learning situations is totally bogus.
There was also something said about the child becoming distressed when she was talking to the counselor about her faith and the counselor wasn't listening. They took that as her being so "rigid" in her faith that she couldn't accept others not believing as she does. Well, perhaps that was her reason, but I don't know any child who wouldn't get frustrated when they are talking to an adult about something that is important to them and have the adult not pay attention. That sounds like the counselor was TRYING to get her to be upset about it.
Sadly, what it sounds like, is that the divorced parents have a dispute. So, instead of working it out like mature, rational adults, they allowed their child to get stuck in the middle of their battle. However, it seriously concerns me that a court would rule such a thing against the custodial parent's wishes. She was obviously doing fine academically. I didn't think the school's job was to determine what was acceptable SOCIAL behavior. And, if it is, and what we see/hear about in alot of schools is what is deemed acceptable, then God help us all..... My viewpoint on this particular issue is coming from living in an area that has alot of social issues - drugs, sex, violence by 4th grade, etc.... Obviously not all areas are like this.
Here's the link to the entire story. There is a poll to vote in as well to get your opinion of which constitutional right is most "offended" by this ruling. I think they all are offended personally...
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 148 ( 1 removed by Renita P. )
I'm praying, and doing everything to get the word out....God says where two or more come together He will be there so let's join eachother in praying for this issue!!
Lots and lots of prayer needed.
It is too bad that the judge is even putting the religion aspect into making his decision.
You are right about the horrible precedent...If they don't get rid of homeschooling altogether, we will probably have to teach our children about all different kinds of religions....which would definitely be better then outlawing it all together, but still I think the Government needs to stay out of the religious aspects...
don't you see, that its not about Christianity? in fact it being christian has nothing to do with it, as far as I can see. Get your head out of your persecution complex.
I do think it was more to do with the one parent's belief following "normal" society standards than anything else.
I would like to know how it's not about Christianity...when the judge found that the homeschool was working for the child in all areas except for the fact that her mother was a Christian who taught her daughter Christian principles and beliefs....
"A NH court has ordered this child to go to public school because
a)she's too rigid in her Christian beliefs"
Straight from the article:
"According to ADF allied attorney John Anthony Simmons, the court acknowledges that the girl in question is doing well socially and academically, but he adds that the court went too far when they determined that the girl's Christian faith was a "bit too sincerely held and must be sifted, tested by, and mixed among other worldviews."
it doesn't hurt their psychological development to not be exposed to porn.
it DOES hurt their psychological development to have no exposure to ideas that differ from their own.
Jenysie, you are missing the point.
the problem is not what the belief is, its the fact that she has no exposure to any other worldviews whatsoever. that is not healthy.
Yep.."doing well socially and academically" does not sound like a child who can't function well in society..
also missing the point.
thinking that a counseling session is the proper place to start preaching, is not a trait of being in the progress of learning to function in society.
being upset because someone disagrees with you or doesn't give you attention when you preach at them in the wrong time and place, is not a sign of normal functioning either.
the article linked makes it quite clear that she had no exposure to other worldviews.... thats not healthy... how do you think such a person would react, with no developed ability to deal with other ideas than their own... no "skin" against people disagreeing with them... when they go out and suddenly the world doesn't care, and 99% of the time, not only disagrees, but adamantly thinks they are wrong.
the poor girl would kill herself in a week.
are you a homeschooling parent?
Do you know any homeschooling parents??
we do expose our children to different worldviews...from a Christian perspective most of the time, but they still learn the same world history, and they still watch the news...
You should take a look at some homeschooling curriculum...
Not to mention the fact that most homeschooled children are involved in a lot more "outside the home" activities...dance, soccer, basketball, baseball, football, art, music...etc....and guess what there are other people there...
Homeschooling is not where a child is restricted to home and home alone until they are 18...homeschoolers go on more field trips than public schooled children...they go to college more often than public schooled children, and it statistics show that homeschooled children become more productive citizens in the community....not to mention that their grades are higher....(statistics)
They learn the joy of learning and are not confined to a classroom filled with 50 other students...they get one on one help...and undivided attention....
Maybe you should do some research....
Not to mention that you are missing this part of the article:
Furthermore, Amanda attended her local public school to take art, Spanish, and P.E. classes. Her public school instructors also commented on the fact that Amanda was well-rounded in her social skills. But a sticking point arose concerning Voydatch's Christian faith.
hm....did you read that she was exposed to PUBLIC SCHOOL for some classes....
If the counselor started asking her about her beliefs, that would be an open door for her to discuss what she believes. Especially as a 10 yr old who feels that she's in the middle of a battle, which obviously she is - a battle between her parents who cannot agree on her education. It's not HER fault that her two adult parents can't work out a solution without putting her in the middle. Yeah, I think any 10 yr old kid would be 'rigid' about almost anything at that point.
Most children of strong faith already know to 'can it' if the audience isn't receptive. Same as if she was talking constantly about video games or her doll collection. Fanaticism is never pretty.
If there is no opposing views in her life, what do you think its going to be like for her when she goes to college? Gets a job? The definition of 'hell' comes to mind.
Insulating a child that thoroughly so that she feels she must "witness" to a counselor calls for intervention. No matter what her family's faith is, you don't go around trying to hammer it into other peoples' heads like that.
Besides, if the mother is that concerned that she have a religious environment while learning, send her to Catholic school.
Keeping her from normal contact with others and shielding her from the world are not going to help her.
I am all for homeschooling for the right reasons. To twist and dement your child would not be one of them.
Jensie and Renita, fine, she has some public school classes.
now, why is her "christian faith" EVEN BROUGHT UP TO BE AN ISSUE, in art, PE or language classes?
hmm, maybe, with the other notation that she has no clue of time and place for such things... she brought it up when it didn't belong?
that is clearly not a normal functioning situation, and it seems clear the people in charge of finding things out, found that she had a distinct lack of ability to deal with people who didn't agree with her, or act like she acts.
where in the article did it suggest that was the case?
what came to mind when i read that part,was that probably, the girl started preaching, and the counselor didn't reflect utter agreement and approval at what she was saying, listening intently and agreeingly.
to someone whos never experienced someone NOT agreeing, a dead-neutral "listening" would come across as ignoring or even attacking.
Children should be made to feel that what they have to say is important even if the adult doesn't agree.
I disagree. they shouldn't always be made to feel that what they have to say is important, because it isn't always important.
they should be given a chance to make a case when its appropriate, but they should know when to shut up.
myself 15-20 years younger would be appalled at my saying this, but sometimes "because I said so, now be quiet" is the right thing for a child to hear.
But likewise, why is it right for the GOVERNMENT to tell a parent that a child cannot feel that way.
thats not what I read to be going on.
a child needs to know when its the right time and place to voice an opinion, and they need to be able to deal with others having other opinions than their own.
the article made it clear, to me, that this girl had NO clue of when it was the right time to discuss certain things, when the person who they are talking to's actions signal "this isn't the right time/place" and to act accordingly..
it seemed obvious that the whole PROBLEM is that she had no coping skills for encountering/dealing with people who didn't share her opinion. and thats BAD. it is harmful to have no coping mechanisms for dealing with people who disagree with you.
Obviously the child's father DOESN'T believe the same way so I'm sure she would have been exposed to both belief systems right there.
I might agree. ... if the article hadn't said that SHE FEELS LIKE HER FATHER DOESN'T LOVE HER BECAUSE HES A DIFFERENT RELIGION!
it isn't about religion.
its about lack of socialization and ability to deal with, analyze and be in the presence of differing opinions.
religion is NOT the issue. the article made it clear as day to me, that the issue is that she was not being socialized in critical ways. such as being able to deal with other viewpoints.
"obviously she had been socialized with these kids already"
Which of her friends did this article mention?
I doubt she had any real contact with the other children outside the classroom and, if she was insisting on preaching to a teacher, I seriously doubt she had friends in the few classes she attended.
The same thing would have happened if a kid was too much into hentai and insisted on discussing it with those who preferred otherwise. There'd be serious questions on his home life.
And that poll was skewed. It didn't ask if any right had been violated, but which one. Like polling "Did you have a boa constrictor or a python as a pet growing up?" They're going to get an answer they can use regardless of how you vote.
obviously something is lacking though, because theres no reason her religious faith should have come up in those classes. that it was a problem makes it seem like shes bringing it up inappropriately.
From what you said I see the problem as being the "counselor." (S)he can put nearly anything into a report and the court will accept it because (s)he is obviously a trained professional and obviously knows more than a mere child.
it seems abundantly clear to me from the article, that the girl in question was *NOT* getting a well rounded education.
I mean preaching at a counselor in the middle of a session and getting upset that they don't listen? I would bet that the counselor wasn't even "not listening" but more accurately not AGREEING. I could totally see how to a young person who had a sheltered upbringing, the distinction would not be clear.
It is never wrong for anyone to share their beliefs with others. IF she got upset with the counselor who was discussing the idea with her, that would perhaps show some rigidity. (gee, a 10 year old again), but she got upset with the adult who was judging her wasn't listening.
My daughter informed me at 10 years old that she was an adult. If I didn't believe her, I could ask any kid in her class at school. She held on rigidly to that belief until she actually became an adult.
its reasonable for a 5 year old to get visibly upset when they are not paid attention to.
a 10 year old should know there are times to talk about certain things, and there are times where they need to wait, or whatever.
what you said reminds me of something my parents made a point of teaching me when I was little. if adults are talking, that I had to wait to say what I wanted to say.
if they are supposed to be discussing one thing, and the child insists on yammering on about something completely unrelated, it is not beneficial to them to be allowed to yammer on. its all about TIME AND PLACE.
It is never wrong for anyone to share their beliefs with others.
in a philosophical sense you are right. but the issue is a matter of TIME AND PLACE. there is a time and place for talking about certain things. and knowing when its the right time and place is important.
where are you people getting this "purposely not listening" idea? I realize you want to side with the kid, I would have felt the same way 15 years ago. but most likely the kid's perception of the situation was warped by inexperience and being sheltered. I saw NOTHING in the article that suggested the counselor was pretending to not listen.
but honestly even if they were, kids need to know the right time and place, and be able to deal with not being listened to.
The court order stated: "According to the guardian ad litem's further report and testimony, the counselor found Amanda to lack some youthful characteristics. She appeard to reflect her mother's rigidity on questions of faith." The guardian noted that during a counseling session, Amanda tried to witness to the counselor and appeared "visibly upset" when the counselor purposefully did not pay attention."
don't believe me...check it out...
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=659638
7th paragraph...
Straight from the court order, which tells a somewhat different story:There's a lot of other information in the court order that has (conveniently?) been left out of the article you linked to.
The father doesn't want his daughter to be home schooled. If, as stated in Simmons' supporting brief, the "Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the 'rights of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody and control of their children' are fundamental", then surely the father's right to make those decisions is just as fundamental as the mother's.
but I agree with Wyoming, if a 10 year old can't handle someone not paying attention to them... thats not good.
but it sounds like, from Wil's notation, that it wasn't even as you suggest at all.
Renita, I agree that a 10 year old would not have the awareness of subtle hints to shut up, that adults (theoretically) "should" have, but when I was 10 I sure as hell knew better than this girl apparently does.
Apparently because it is part of the disagreement between the parents. But with regard to the decision about whether she should continue to be home schooled or not, the order said that religion wasn't a factor:Based on the information provided in the order, it seems that religion came into it because it was part the mother's argument for reducing the amount of time Amanda would be allowed to spend with her father.
Anyone's religion SHOULD impact their interactions with others. As a Christian, if I behaved in a completely wicked & awful way to people, then that doesn't say much about my beliefs. I still see it as her religion being a factor...
Perhaps the mother could have/should have been more cooperative. Who knows - from this it's hard to tell which parent is being the most bullheaded and unreasonable. Surely most people could come to a better solution than causing a child to go through this type of legal process.. But, sadly, I know this type of stuff happens far too much.
This little girl's beliefs seem to be impacting on her interactions with others in a bad way. Or at least bad in the eyes of her father, and in the eyes of the court.
"As a Christian, if I behaved in a completely wicked & awful way to people, then that doesn't say much about my beliefs."
If you were behaving in such an awful way because of your beliefs, then I would think that might say a great deal about your beliefs. And if you were a minor child, that sort of behavior, as well as those sorts of beliefs, might be of considerable concern to your parent or parents.
I agree that it would've been better if the parents could've worked out an agreement without the need for mediation and the court's involvement, but unfortunately they couldn't. I also agree that such situations are far too common these days.
is there something wrong with being a strong believer in your religion of choice?
if it hinders your functioning as a person, yes.
Would they have done the same if her religion of choice was something other than Christianity??
why would you assume otherwise, if it was a problem?
and if you were offered to say where the line is, I bet you'd put it in a far less generous place than the line probably was in this case...
If that means that she is respectful, obedient, etc and not mouthing off or misbehaving, how is this a problem? I'm not sure what exactly they meant, but many homeschool children have a different set of standards. Certainly not all, but in my area, it's a big difference.
if if if.
what IF it means that a 12 year old is acting, and has the mental/emotional "wear"/"aging" of a 90 year old? that is wrong. that is unhealthy. that is cruel and destructive. would you agree, if that were the case, that it was a problem?
There was also something said about the child becoming distressed when she was talking to the counselor about her faith and the counselor wasn't listening.
what if this means that she was unable to comprehend, or deal with the concept of another person not agreeing with her? that it gave her severe problems to be exposed to someone who simply didn't agree. not that was attacking her, or degrading her beliefs, but simply didn't agree. if THAT were the case, would you not agree that her current situation was NOT preparing her for a functional life?
Well, perhaps that was her reason, but I don't know any child who wouldn't get frustrated when they are talking to an adult about something that is important to them and have the adult not pay attention.
you are seeming to assume it was something wrong with what the counselor was doing. IF it was not a matter of the adult not listening/paying attention, but one of simply not agreeing and confirming her belifs, that she felt like she wasn't being listened to, because someone didn't agree? thats a problem.
I didn't think the school's job was to determine what was acceptable SOCIAL behavior.
part of the purpose of schooling is to help teach a person how to function in the world. if they were determining that the girl's current education was not doing so, how is that not reasonably within their role?
-------
" The guardian noted that during a counseling session, Amanda tried to witness to the counselor and appeared "visibly upset" when the counselor purposefully did not pay attention.(the article)
that imo, is a sign, rightfully, of something not being right with the girl's education. she should be able to comprehend that preaching at a counselor like that is not the right time or place for it, and be able to handle someone not paying attention to her preaching. especially when its done in the wrong time/place.
The guardian also noted that Amanda's relationship with her father suffered because she did not think he loved her as much as he said he did due to the fact that he refused to "adopt her religious beliefs."
you don't see that as a problem?
.Amanda would be best served by exposure to different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior."
you don't see a problem with a child being raised in a situation where they are ENTIRELY unexposed to any differing points of view or behaviors?
people need to learn how to deal with people not agreeing or acting like THEY determine is right. they need to reconcile and evaluate different opinions.
I agree with the Court, at least as described in this article, on this case.
and the article gave the impression that she was remarkably unable to deal with people disagreeing with her.
"Would they have done the same if her religion of choice was something other than Christianity??
why would you assume otherwise, if it was a problem?
and if you were offered to say where the line is, I bet you'd put it in a far less generous place than the line probably was in this case..." --from you
Here is an example of them not doing anything because the religion in question is muslim...
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20090727/christian-wrestling-coach-sues-school-muslim-principal/index.html
and just in case you don't trust a christian source...
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2009/07/tmlc_files_suit_against_muslim.php
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2009/07/tmlc_files_suit_against_muslim.php
I suggest all homeschoolers become members of HSLDA
(Home School Legal Defense Assoication)
http://www.hslda.org/Default.asp?bhcp=1
I wanted to investigate this case a bit further but have not been able to find any sources that were not biased in one direction or the other.
Regardless of if the decision was correct or not it is one that is going to have a dramatic effect on this child's life.
There are many sides to this case. Some people will look at it from the Christian aspect, others will see it as an attack on homeschooling but I see it as a clear indicator that there is something very flawed about the way courts make decisions regarding parental rights and concerns.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2009/08/27/nh_mother_wants_to_continue_home_schooling/
This is a parental custody case. The COURTS did not arbitrarily make the decision. The girl's FATHER is the one that brought the case up. As Linda said, this has zero to do with homeschooling and everything to do with the parents themselves. Let's not pretend this is an attack on Christians or homeschooling.
Yep.
why? why in that hypothetical would you doubt that there would be this situation if they weren't christian?
While not what I, as an adult, would have done, I disagree that it was wrong to tell the counselor her religious beliefs. If she'd been into soccer or playing the piano, no one would have faulted her for expressing her values and trying to convince the counselor soccer was better than softball or that playing the piano is better than playing the clarinet. I suspect this "too religious" remark has been regretted by the judge and was more an opinion by the court appointed attorney.
I support ACLU's protection of all our civil rights. This sounds like a case for them. Whether someone decides a child is too Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or atheist sound like a violation of our civil rights and the constitution.
when you were 10 you would have been incapable of answering that without trying to convert the person who asked you?
you would not have had a clue that it was possible to answer the question without trying to convert them?
you would not have had any inkling that it was the wrong time and place to try to convince them to change to your way of thinking?
you could not have just answered that question?
at 10 I knew at least the rudiments of what my religious beliefs were, and I could express them without feeling compelled to try to convert anyone, and if I had such a feeling, I'd have known it wasn't the right time or place.
but maybe I was just a genius or something.
River, I've known many people over the years who are much, much older and more mature than a 10 year old child who are visibly upset when being ignored.
There is nothing wrong with a child being passionate about her religion. Just because you weren't doesn't mean other equally well-adjusted kids aren't.
Freedom of religion is rather empty if strangers can decide that your religious beliefs are too rigid so you need change.
I would fault her if she didn't know that it was not the appropriate time to talk about those things. Obviously, she did more than just state her religion.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2009/07/tmlc_files_suit_against_muslim.php
The principal has yet to be charged....
and also the principal fired Hancock over religious views...
are you nuts? that isn't remotely comparable.
hmm...could it be because he's muslim???
I am not comparing...you seem to think that religion played no part in this...and I'm saying it does...and people were asking what if these people weren't Christians....
Christians are being persecuted...that's my opinion...I'm a free thinker...watch out!
I just wish some people would open their eyes to the bigger picture...look around....it's not only Christians, it's also Christian principles...and such things as the Constitution...
Oh wait...I forgot that's not being attacked at all, right??
and we are all entitled to share the wealth of the people that make 250,000+ a year because we deserve it...right??
sorry ranting...but seriously...I can't believe how differently two people can look at black and white...
And doesn't her father have a right to have a say in his daughter's education? The article you link to also states that she didn't think her father loved her as much as he said he didn't because he didn't adopt her religious beliefs. I'm sorry but how is that not damaging to a child?
This cannot be the entire story of what has been going on.
When I worked in a public library, I met homeschoolers all the time. One day a parent asked me for a video about 20 minutes long on the Civil War. That's how he was teaching his kids, by having them watch videos. He didn't want them in public school because he felt they were an evil influence.
On the other hand, I had friends who homeschooled their son because they felt the schools weren't meeting his needs. Despite having mild learning disabilities, he was able to start community college at the age of 16.
The motive behind the homeschooling makes a lot of difference as to the quality of education a child receives.
Home schooling is not my cup of tea. I went to public school and loved it. My kids all went to public schools and they loved it. They are doctors and lawyers and have excelled in life. I know some parents do a good job but a lot of them don't. Some are just too lazy to urge their children to stay in school and declare them to be home schooled. They end up getting GED and working at the burger joints. Here in Texas there have been numerous cases of child abuse associated with home schooling and that is not a good thing. The state is obligated to protect the child. that is what the court is for.
I'm sure all of you folks are good homeschoolers but not all homeschoolers are. They do need to be watched.
I agree that certain academic standards need to be met whether a child is homeschooled or not. Absolutely. In my case, my oldest daughter is a good 1.5 years ahead of where she would be in public school AND she is better equipped socially as she is accustomed to being around all ages of children and adults - not just her own class.
Sadly there are those who don't homeschool properly and those are the ones that are always in the news. RARELY will you see a newstory saying "Look how great these homeschool kids are." It's negative sensationalism that gets views.
And, some public schools are far better than others. I happen to live is one of the worst, which was another reason for my decision to homeschool.
I agree that this was more about parental dispute. But I still stand that her RELIGION should not have been used as the basis for the decision. It should have had to do with either her academic ability or her father's parental right to choose what he feels is best. Obviously the mother's rights are there too, but he was the opposing parent in this case.
Evil is everywhere and by living you take your chances. If you live in an area where the public schools are substandard and you are truly capable of home schooling good for you, I applaud your tenacity.
This has nothing to do with real Christianity... it has to do with a sick version of it. Iys a good thing Christ wasnt home schooled...then no ones sins would have been forgiven.
Homeschooling is just a way of passing on the evils of prejudice and intolerance, in teh name of Christ... Its been tried through history and never worked for good.
Just my opinion , letting you know that not all who believe in Christ think the same.
I'm not sure how you figure that homeschooling being tried throughout history hasn't worked. Maybe you should check out the statistics on current homeschooled children... You can see the results of the NATIONWIDE STUDY here. You obviously have no real first-hand knowledge of the average homeschooling family.
My entire POINT of this article is that her freedom of religion is not an acceptable reason for courts to force her into a public school. If her academics were lacking or if they did it because her father wanted it, that would be one thing. But to use religion as their reason is unconstitutional - REGARDLESS of which religion it is...
One has to have a strong faith to let their children grow up in the "real" world,, but I do believe it is better and prepares them better to be a good citizen. A Parents job is not to just teach, but prepare their children to face the real world. Adversity builds character and competence
If more children were home schooled the country wouldn't be in the sad shape it is in.
Oh and just wondering...did you know you spelled Catt wrong? There's only one T....
I'm a homeschooling mother, correcting spelling errors are a part of my job, although my daughter hasn't had any since she was 5!...
Renita: I don't mean to be offensive, but the ignorant ones are you and Jenysie. Instead of a long-winded response, I will point to the sad tale of Jaycee Dugard as my example on what homeschooling could produce. So many children that are being abused would never find help because no teacher outside the family is there to observe. Bias would be a serious problem because you have no idea what other parents are teaching theirs.
Jenysie: Google the name. I am not alone in a little thing called "alternate spelling". As a so-called teacher, you should have been aware of this phenomenon by now. Speaks of your lack of education that you did not. Also, you are a prime example on what I said. If you are the sole arbiter on what your poor children are learning (intolerant, insulting, judgmental, rudeness, condemnation without knowing all the facts), then I pity them and the life you are creating for them by not letting (obviously) more qualified people show your children a better way of interacting with other human beings.
Go ahead and think what you want. I know who is showing their ignorance. You apparently know nothing about normal homeschoolers and are using every extreme case of abuse by psyhos as your basis for an opinion. Of course you don't hear about the normal homeschooling families - that isn't worthy of sensationalized news. But, gee, considering one of the NATIONAL finalists for spelling bee was a homeschooler doesn't count. The fact that colleges are RECRUITING homeschooled students, realizing they are the leaders of the student governments doesn't count, and surely the national study on homeschoolers has nothing intelligent to say. You can see that report here if you wish to educate yourself just a tad.
I maintain that homeschooling can be detrimental to some children, as well as beneficial to others. Andrea Yates. Neil and Christy Edgar. And since you mentioned the NSB and Serena Laine-Lobsinger, please remember Marjorie Lavery, as well.
I could name more but it really isn't necessary. I shudder to think of the children that are supposedly 'homeschooled' when in fact its just a cover to hide years of abuse. Also, are you aware that one of the biggest advocates for homeschooling are the KKK? (Just ask: I'll show you the links)
It's hard to know how widespread the abuse might be because the government doesn't keep track. We don't even know how many children are taught at home in this country.
The major reason most people have for homeschooling is RELIGION. Like Generation Joshua, it is not simply distrust of the public schools, but specifically on the grounds of the curriculum being at odds with parental beliefs. This coincides with a lot of 'racial-purity' beliefs, as well.
I DID my research years before you posted this article. Therefore I do not disagree that great things can come from homeschooling. But we as a people cannot properly monitor the education (or mis-education) of our children should the majority of citizens opt for homeschooling, hence the comments regarding "inbreeding" and "intolerance". I stand by my premise that this country would come to ruin were that to happen.