Right.

19 03 2009

Homeschooling issue? No. Prejudiced judge issue? No.

The judge in the NC divorce case, with the homeschooled children, has issued his temporary order.

Judge: “Cult” Factored in ruling

Not a homeschooling issue.

A cult brainwashed mother issue. Like the hand wringing California case of a year ago, the judge’s order represents the findings for ONE unique case, and the order is specific to ONE unique family. Should NC homeschooling parents worry? Well, sure, if they whacked out religious nuts and their sane spouse is divorcing them.

That specific California case has not prevented even ONE other family to homeschool their children, and this NC case will not prevent anyone else from homeschooling either. Well, again, unless they’re a whacked out nutcase who has completely alienated their spouse and real family in favor of a cult, then they might be prevented from homeschooling. But like the other NC whackjob homeschooler who killed her son, sometimes these cases lead to the right kinds of increased oversight.

I read the court order, and frankly, I would be shocked if ANY homeschool parent, belonging to ANY belief system, still believes these children should be homeschooled by this woman. I’m not shocked that WND is still advocating that this woman should continue to homeschool. I’m not shocked that the woman’s equally nutty “friend” is still whining on her equally nutty blog. Honestly. Read it for yourselves, but just let me add….

I TOLD YOU SO. Again.


Actions

Informations

12 responses to “Right.”

19 03 2009
COD (10:38:01) :

//I would be shocked if ANY homeschool parent…//

You are giving homeschooling parents too much credit. I guarantee that the crowd at Spunky’s is still 100% behind cult mom.

19 03 2009
Doc (11:07:52) :

I’m still shocked, regardless of the fact that I know there are stupid homeschooling parents out there. I don’t follow Spunky because I think she’s a moron. That’s my opinion of those who read and support her POV too. Honestly, the number of morons out there does shock me.

19 03 2009
ElectricBarbarella (13:28:36) :

You know, just like snoops, you are one of those lib’rl dem-crats that we have to watch out for. They are trying to take away our rights, how can you not see this!!?!@?!?!?!?!?!?

::headdesk zonk… idiots…

And yes, spunky’s crowd IS behind this mom. Weird Nut Donkey Butt won’t give up the goat for this one. They swear they are right and everyone else is wrong.

toni

19 03 2009
Moses (14:41:14) :

Honestly, the number of morons out there does shock me.

Not me. But then I’ve got a very low opinion of the human race.

19 03 2009
Elisheva Levin (18:25:33) :

Upon reading the decision, a few things jumped out at me:
First, it was the mother who petitioned to restrict the father from influencing his childen. She chose to get the court involved, and she agreed that since the father (who sounds like the sane parent) and she could not agree, that the court should decide.

The judge also stated that he does not have a bad opinion about homeschooling in general, but that since the parents cannot agree about it, the court needs to make a determination. He is careful to stipulate that the kids begin school in the fall, and in the decision makes a visitation schedule that makes allowances for homeschooling.
This sounds like a judge who is doing his best to preserve a modicum of stability for the children during the divorce proceedings.

Finally, it is clear from the affidavits mentioned that there is a concern about the religious cult that the mother has joined and its effect on the children. Thus the requirement of a mental health evaluation for the mother. (And it is interesting that the mother’s parents express great concern about how the cult affects their grandchildren’s well being). In the decision (which is temporary pending the divorce proceedings and the mental health and custody evaluations) the judge is very fair in allowing the parents to each observe his or her own religion and include the children.

It’s darn hard to see how this judge is prejudiced against religion. This is a matter of a divorce case and a religious dispute between the parents. It is also about a dispute between the parents about the best educational setting for the children. It may be about child abuse as well, although that is yet to be determined.

Even the Christian home school organization (I always forget the letters) does not see this case as a problem.

Right on all counts, Doc!

PS: What is WND? I am guessing it is not the Chicago radio station! :)

19 03 2009
Doc (20:27:20) :

World Net Daily. Possibly the most biased news source EVER.

20 03 2009
mongoliangirl (06:05:52) :

I would love to order that tape set she mentions called ‘Gossip and the Gospel’. Because, you know, it sounds like she would be a really good gossip from the way she’s twisted this thing around with such acumen.

20 03 2009
Tina (11:14:04) :

I live in NC. I moved here from 35 miles away, in VA. I can tell you that NC is a repository for backwoods, small-minded, crazy fuckers. Some people think I’m one of them but from my POV I wonder how I could have lived so close and never realized that civil rights didn’t occur here. That I can’t be socially acceptable and not a church-goer, both at the same time–it’s all or nothing baby. I realize that my tiny experience doesn’t really speak to the entire state but damn if it isn’t just DIFFERENT south of the border.
FWIW, I homeschool here. No one has beaten my door down yet or insisted that my children head off to the local public school where a common punishment for children is to be sent to the principal’s office for taking God’s name in vain.
Yeah.

20 03 2009
JJ Ross (11:40:54) :

The border between VA and NC, you mean? LOL — didn’t know there was such a difference. It’s still SOUTH!

23 03 2009
Suze (20:22:42) :

“But like the other NC whackjob homeschooler who killed her son, sometimes these cases lead to the right kinds of increased oversight.”

You mean, increased oversight of State placements of children into foster care and adoption, right?

I’d just like to clarify that (as is the case more often than not) this “whacko nutjob” homeschooler was not abusing children who were in any way “hidden” by or because of homeschooling. The child she killed was given to her by the State– even against Its [agents’] better judgment:

“Social workers had plenty of warning that Sean might be harmed at Paddock’s home. Wake County social workers had misgivings about putting him in the crowded house, miles outside the nearest town; a bruised backside after his first visit made them even more nervous.”

“Bruised backside after the first visit?” WTF? “Nervous”???

Homeschooling had NOTHING to do with four-year-old Sean Paddock’s death.

(Not that I’m implying that anybody here isn’t aware that that situation wasn’t a social services fuck-up from the get-go; I just want it to be real clear for any anti-homeschooling nutjobs who might happen along this post.)

24 03 2009
JJ Ross (04:50:00) :

Much like this case then — not about homeschooling and the real villain is Church, not State.

What killed Sean Paddock wasn’t state authority (custody judge or social worker) but his legal “mother’s” deadly dangerous delusion she was doing god’s will by surrendering her individual judgment and humanity to a fringe authoritarian religious “ministry” that had nothing to do with any kind of “education.”

1 04 2009
Moses's Monkey (08:54:24) :

That woman is a physco. She KILLED her toddler.

Read the policies page before commenting

You can use these tags : <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>