Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the children are not given the authority to choose to go to school, then the children have no religious freedom, only parental coercion.
Who is to judge? The children are to judge. If they want to go to school and the government forces them to obey their parents, then the government is violating the children's religious autonomy. The US Constitution says that all persons may choose their religion. It does not say they must be 18 or older to do it.
The freedom of religion is not only the freedom to choose any or no religion. It is also the freedom to choose not to interpret the teachings literally. Religious freedom means you can decide that you will be a liberal or a conservative, and live the teachings fully, or only partially. Even if you are a minor!
Any time minors are prohibited from obtaining their birth certificate without parental consent, or denied access to documents that allow them to prove their residency, or told that because they are under 18 they may not register for school without parental consent, the government is being used by the parents as an agent of coercion. In effect the parents are imposing their religion on the kids, by force. This is true unless and until the children are allowed to do every step in the process of school registration, without being barred from doing so by a lack of parental consent. In other words, the children of these parents should be allowed to formally request a birth certificate and proof of residency, just like an adult can, and sign up for school by filling out the forms, just as an adult can.
Unless and until this happens, the government is unconstitutionally violating the children's religious freedom, because the Constitution does not limit religious freedom to those who are 18 years and older. Therefore, it is unconstitutional for there to be a rule requiring a person to be 18 or older to obtain their birth certificate without parental consent. Such a law removes authority from children, and abridges on their freedom to interpret their faith non-literally.
We need to stop treating children as property. They are people. Yes, they are young people, but people nonetheless, not chattel.
So you want kids to be wards of the state? Instead of with their parents?
That is EXACTLY what you are advocating. It's a very dangerous idea.
No one's life is over at 18. You can ALWAYS learn. Always.
You said "remove minors from their homes". Explain how "removal" could occur without transportation. If you are talking about just getting the minor to go to school, this is not the state removing the minor, this is the minor taking the school bus to school. Is this what you mean?
No, nothing to do with you write. I mean make them wards of the state and remove them from their natural family.
I know some people won't let their kids continue education after age 14. The reason told to me is because "they need to work and make money".
They are paid well, nice homes, VERY nice cars, and take most weekends off.
Why would a parent want to limit education for their kids? Control?
Who are you talking about? Amish people? (Their kids stop going to school after 8th grade.)
No, seriously. Who are you hanging out with that you're hearing some groundswell of support for stopping formal education at FOURTEEN YEARS OLD????????
Who are you talking about? Amish people? (Their kids stop going to school after 8th grade.)
No, seriously. Who are you hanging out with that you're hearing some groundswell of support for stopping formal education at FOURTEEN YEARS OLD????????
An employee. I just talked to another German Mennonite(from Texas) that said their sons finish school at 14 and their daughters finish school at 13.
After that, they must go out and get jobs.
I don't "hang out" with these people. They are generally very good people, we just have different views and not as much in common. I have nothing against them, except taking their kids out of school at such a young age.
An employee. I just talked to another German Mennonite(from Texas) that said their sons finish school at 14 and their daughters finish school at 13.
After that, they must go out and get jobs.
I don't "hang out" with these people. They are generally very good people, we just have different views and not as much in common. I have nothing against them, except taking their kids out of school at such a young age.
OP, you have to admit that your first post, and thread title, were a bit misleading. It did, indeed, sound like you were "hanging out" with, whether at work or elsewhere, people who believed in taking their kids out of school at 14. Of course, some correctly guessed right away that it was a matter of a religious sect, but you could have stated that from the start.
High school should have two tracks. One for those that are college bound and one for those who will be working in the trades. We will never come close to everyone going to college. Not even close. There needs to be an avenue for those that are not college material.
OP, you have to admit that your first post, and thread title, were a bit misleading. It did, indeed, sound like you were "hanging out" with, whether at work or elsewhere, people who believed in taking their kids out of school at 14. Of course, some correctly guessed right away that it was a matter of a religious sect, but you could have stated that from the start.
I apologize. I didn't think it was that important of our relationship as much as at the age of 14, work or education. I didn't explain all well enough.
High school should have two tracks. One for those that are college bound and one for those who will be working in the trades. We will never come close to everyone going to college. Not even close. There needs to be an avenue for those that are not college material.
Some schools do have that, but the problem is, the children of color tend to get shunted into the non-college-bound track, automatically. I've seen that happen to bright kids, who were deemed "not college material". If educators could be truly objective, then it could work.
I also met a guy in Europe, who'd been relegated to the trades track, doomed to boredom the rest of his life. Happily for him, his mother was Romanian, and at the time Romania had an outreach program for the children of emigres, enticing them back to the motherland with college scholarships. He grabbed his chance, got his college education free, all the way through the PhD level, and eventually became a university professor back in the country of his birth. The two-track (or multi-track) education plan has its good points and bad points. It can trap people for life.
Who expects their kids to work vs school at 14? Is this in the US?
Amish, Mennonites, Chassidics. They tend to have a continuous religious education, but rarely nothing more. Their schools tend to forge school records for the state and most times the states look the other way. If one goes on to YouTube, one will find videos of these kids as adults who left the order, got educated and got a real life. What they lose when they leave the order is contact with the family.
If the children are not given the authority to choose to go to school, then the children have no religious freedom, only parental coercion.
Who is to judge? The children are to judge. If they want to go to school and the government forces them to obey their parents, then the government is violating the children's religious autonomy. The US Constitution says that all persons may choose their religion. It does not say they must be 18 or older to do it.
The freedom of religion is not only the freedom to choose any or no religion. It is also the freedom to choose not to interpret the teachings literally. Religious freedom means you can decide that you will be a liberal or a conservative, and live the teachings fully, or only partially. Even if you are a minor!
Any time minors are prohibited from obtaining their birth certificate without parental consent, or denied access to documents that allow them to prove their residency, or told that because they are under 18 they may not register for school without parental consent, the government is being used by the parents as an agent of coercion. In effect the parents are imposing their religion on the kids, by force. This is true unless and until the children are allowed to do every step in the process of school registration, without being barred from doing so by a lack of parental consent. In other words, the children of these parents should be allowed to formally request a birth certificate and proof of residency, just like an adult can, and sign up for school by filling out the forms, just as an adult can.
Unless and until this happens, the government is unconstitutionally violating the children's religious freedom, because the Constitution does not limit religious freedom to those who are 18 years and older. Therefore, it is unconstitutional for there to be a rule requiring a person to be 18 or older to obtain their birth certificate without parental consent. Such a law removes authority from children, and abridges on their freedom to interpret their faith non-literally.
We need to stop treating children as property. They are people. Yes, they are young people, but people nonetheless, not chattel.
I agree.
Well said.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(Their kids stop going to school after 8th grade.)
