Over the past year, we have seen an increase in the number of accusations from secularists that what AiG teaches children is “child abuse.” This term of “child abuse”’ is being used more and more in general about Christians teaching their children. These secularists are not only intolerant of the absolutes of Christianity (despite their frequent calls for what they call “tolerance”), but they are intolerant of Christians. We have seen much name calling and personal attacks in recent times. Certainly the absolutes of Christianity are intolerant of the secularists’ moral relativism, but as Christians, we should not be intolerant and hateful of the person who has these views.
It is amazing to me how inconsistent these secularists are. On the one hand they accuse Christians of attacking them personally, when it is really their beliefs we disagree with (because of God’s Word). Yet they turn around and attack Christians beliefs and attack Christians personally.
Here are just some of the links to previous blog posts where I discussed this issue:
- Abusing Children
- More and More Kids Learning the Truth About Creation, Dinosaurs, and Genesis
- Does a Group Called “Free Inquiry” Really Want “Free Inquiry”?
- “Woe to Those who . . . Put Darkness for Light and Light for Darkness”
- Letter Wars
- Teaching Sunday School and Child Abuse
Concerning what the secularists are now arguing, in their “Home School Court Report” they state the following:
Christian homeschooling parents are effectively transmitting values to their children that the elitists believe are dangerous to the well-being of both these very children and society as a whole.Quoting Catherine Ross, a law professor from George Washington Law School, we read in this HSLDA report:
What are those values? Homosexuality is a sin. Men should be the leaders of their families. Jesus is the only way to God. All other religions are false.
I could go on. But what the elitists really mean is the set of religious beliefs that they label as fundamentalist Christianity.
“Many liberal political theorists argue, however, that there are limits to tolerance. In order for the norm of tolerance to survive across generations, society need not and should not tolerate the inculcation of absolutist views that undermine toleration of difference. Respect for difference should not be confused with approval for approaches that would splinter us into countless warring groups. Hence an argument that tolerance for diverse views and values is a foundational principle does not conflict with the notion that the state can and should limit the ability of intolerant homeschoolers to inculcate hostility to difference in their children—at least during the portion of the day they claim to devote to satisfying the compulsory schooling requirement.3”They quote her further with the following:
“If a parent subscribes to an absolutist belief system premised on the notion that it was handed down by a creator, that it (like the Ten Commandments) is etched in stone and that all other systems are wrong, the essential lessons of a civic education (i.e., tolerance and mutual respect) often seem deeply challenging and suspect. If the core principle in a parent’s belief system is that there is only one immutable truth that cannot be questioned, many educational topics will be off limits. Such “private truths” have no place in the public arena, including the public schools.4”The report from HSLDA continues:
And, finally, Professor Ross tells us what she thinks should be done about us, in addition to imposing testing requirements and all manner of academic regulation.This is not just a concern for homeschoolers but a warning for all Christians. I highly recommend you read this report (it was published at the end of 2010). The report has much more alarming information and also references the various quotes etc., so you can also do further research if you need to.I propose that we add to the civics education goals of the state, including lessons on mutual respect for diverse populations and viewpoints as a mandatory curricular requirement. As I observed above, some homeschoolers doubtless are committed to diversity, and this requirement would not conflict with their educational agenda, but this is not the group that concerns me. Imposing curricular requirements about respect for diverse viewpoints will be seen as undermining the most authoritarian conservative homeschoolers—those who believe in an absolute truth which forms the basis of the education they provide their children. Unfortunately, the unavoidable counterpart of a belief in absolute truth is that other belief systems are mistaken at best, and at worst, evil.5
Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,