Wednesday, November 02, 2005

I Agree With The 9th Circus

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday against parents who sued their local school district after their elementary-age children were given a sexually charged survey, saying there is "no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children."

These elementary school children were given a survey asking them about the frequency of:

Touching my private parts too much
Thinking about having sex
Thinking about touching other people's private parts
Thinking about sex when I don't want to
Washing myself because I feel dirty on the inside
Not trusting people because they might want sex
Getting scared or upset when I think about sex
Having sex feelings in my body
Can't stop thinking about sex
Getting upset when people talk about sex

Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote the decision for the court. Part of it reads:

We agree [with the previous ruling], and hold that there is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children, either independent of their right to direct the upbringing and education of their children or encompassed by it. We also hold that parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students. Finally, we hold that the defendants' actions were rationally related to a legitimate state purpose. [emphasis Reinhardt's].

Why do I agree with this ruling? Because your kids have no business being in control of the government for most of their waking hours. When you give the state control of your children for most of their waking hours, you shouldn't expect to have much say in what happens. The state does not serve the interests of the children. The state serves the interests of the state. When you make your children captives of the state, they also must serve the interests of the state up to the time that you remove them from state care.

Would you buy a car without a contract? How about a home? Would you conduct a major business transaction without a contract?

Someone please show me the contract you negotiated with your local public school for the education of your children. Oh, you didn't get one? It must have been an oversight. Or did you simply turn your children over to them with the expectation that you would still be in control? Isn't the education of your children a major transaction? Why wouldn't you demand that they be educated on your terms then?

Think about that for a while and get back to me if you still think the public school system is a good idea.