CA to Parents: You Can’t Home School Your Kids

Once again, I can get past the news without feeling the need to mention this.

In this article by the San Francisco Chronicle titled “Homeschoolers’ setback sends shock waves through state” we are finding out that you simply can’t home school your kids in CA, that is… unless you hold a valid teaching credential. Here’s a snippet from the article that sums it up:

Yet the appeals court said state law has been clear since at least 1953, when another appellate court rejected a challenge by homeschooling parents to California’s compulsory education statutes. Those statutes require children ages 6 to 18 to attend a full-time day school, either public or private, or to be instructed by a tutor who holds a state credential for the child’s grade level.

“California courts have held that … parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children,” Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling issued on Feb. 28. “Parents have a legal duty to see to their children’s schooling under the provisions of these laws.”

Parents can be criminally prosecuted for failing to comply, Croskey said.

“A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare,” the judge wrote, quoting from a 1961 case on a similar issue.

After reading both the article and the published ruling of this case (download the PDF here), it’s my understanding that this isn’t a NEW law, but something that has been in existence since as early as the 1950’s.

I know that many people at my church love home schooling and enjoy the freedom to able to train and educate their children as they see fit. I am honestly amazed that the state of CA has that kind of power, or even feels they have that kind of authority in the home. Of course parents could seek to obtain a teaching credential, but I have no idea how long that would take. Most credentialing programs in California last at least a year and require teaching time in the classroom. This is pretty big news in my mind.

Your thoughts? Leave me a comment.

Always Scrutinized

Christian Photographer Being Sued

Among Family
As I glanced through the headlines during my lunch break, I couldn’t help but be attracted to this one: “Christian Photographer Hauled before Commission for Refusing Same-Sex Job.” The basic gist is that this photographer in New Mexico refused to photograph a homosexual couple and now they are suing. All I have to say is…. woah.

The ramifications of this kind of lawsuit could be enormous, and quite scary. As a Christian and an aspiring photographer myself, I have actually asked myself that question: “What would I do if someone asked me to photograph a homosexual marriage?” But always my answer would be absolutely not. And I never though there would ever be any ramifications of denying someone my services. But if a case like this were to follow through, and this photographer lose… I would not longer be given the right to say no. To say that a private business couldn’t deny business based on her religious views — well, is flat out nuts. Does that mean that churches can’t deny same sex marriages? Does that mean that we should start tearing down the signs that read “no shoes, no shirt, no service” because they discriminate against shoeless and shirtless people? Honestly, I’ll be praying for this photographer. I’m sure she never thought, as I didn’t, that something like this could happen.

What do you think? Leave me a comment below, but be sure and read the article before you do.

Dear Anonymous

In Response to “Why I’m Thinking About Hell” an anonymous commenter wrote the following:

The issue of Judas is strange to me. Why should it be that christians assume Judas to have “sold his soul to satan?” Wasn’t his work beneficial and even necessary to the securing of salvation? If it weren’t for Judas would the prophecies be fulfilled and would Jesus have accomplished his purpose? It seems to me that Judas should be celebrated for the same reasons Christians celebrate Jesus - it was a job that had to be done so that everyone could benefit. And God would curse him for doing it?

Dear Anonymous,

I would agree that Judas betrayal of Christ was to fulfill prophecy. I would also agree that Judas’ work was both beneficial and necessary (in the end) and to our benefit. But I would have to disagree that we should celebrate the work of Judas — I’ll be brief:

First, we can not celebrate the sin of Judas. Christ himself said, “The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born” (Matthew 26:24). Judas sinned before a holy God and we can not celebrate that. Honestly, that line of thinking would lead us down a slippery slope. If we were to celebrate Judas, then we should celebrate Pilate and others for killing Christ.

Secondly, we must understand that Judas is NOT a result of fate. He is still responsible for his own actions before the Lord. Though what he did was inside God’s plan, it does not excuse him from doing what he did in sin. He will be judged just like you and I for his sin.

Finally, Judas’ death is infamous. Acts 1:18 records that after Judas hung himself he fell and “burst open in the middle and all his intestines gushed out.” That doesn’t sound like the kind of man that we should be celebrating. It sounds like the kind of man who would betray God in the flesh. Though I understand your reasoning in seeing the good that God did inspite of Judas’ sin, I can not agree that we should be putting this man on a pedestal and thanking him.

I hope these simple truths from the Scripture can help you discern both the sovereign plan of God and the wickedness of Judas’ actions. If you have any other questions, feel free to share them any time.

Thanks.

Misinterpreting… a lot of things.

Page 11 of 12