 |
| The Romeike family in 2010 photo from NY Times story |
Today I want to cover a particular case. I mentioned this
case back in October 2011. A German family, the Romeikes, an Evangelical
Christian family with six children, found that the German public schools did
not meet their family’s educational needs. They found that local private
schools (which, in Germany, are required to teach the government dictated curriculum
used in public schools) were an even worse environment. They came slowly to look
into homeschooling, which is illegal in Germany, and has been since long before
WWII. A few people do it undercover. (I actually know an American homeschooling
family who worked in Germany for a year, that managed to stay under the radar
during their stay.) The Romeikes finally saw it as their best option, believing
that, if caught, the outcome would be fines they were willing to pay.
It turned out the fines were onerous, and the government
threatened to take the children away from the parents, and possibly imprison
the parents as well.
They did the legal thing; they went through the legal system
in Germany first. Failing there, and with the threat of family dissolution
looming, they came to the United States in 2008 and requested asylum. That was
granted in 2010, by a judge in Tennessee, who spoke strongly in favor of their
parental rights.
There was reason to rejoice, but it didn’t last long. The
Department of Homeland Security (the Immigration and Naturalization Service,
under DHS) stepped up to insist the judge had ruled incorrectly, and that the
family should not be granted asylum.
There are some specific guidelines for qualifying for
asylum. Being persecuted for religious reasons is one; so is being part of a
specific targeted social group, which it is argued homeschoolers are. The judge
in his ruling spelled out why the family qualified, so he was following the
law, even though circumstances were unusual.
The case comes up for appeal before the Sixth Circuit Court
on April 23rd. It’s unclear to me how the case is set up. The
Romeikes won the original case, so no need for appeal. So the government must
have stepped in to insist on appeal, forcing the family to re-defend their
position.
If this were simply a question of asylum, there might be
some conceivable reason for pressing the question. If we allowed just anyone
feeling unhappy in their home country to come here, we would be hard-pressed to
accommodate the rush. But this family has been here since 2008. During the two
years it took to get the ruling in their favor, they were productive and
contributing members of society. During the additional three years, they have
continued their noble behavior—and there has not been a sudden increase in
similar requests for asylum based on homeschooling prejudices (or even
religious prejudices) from Germany or elsewhere.
So the administration has stepped in, pretty much out of the
blue, targeting a clearly harmless family for deportation—when the known
outcome will be termination of custody of their own children, plus hefty fines
and prison terms. Not only will they lose the right to educate their children
as they see fit, they will lose the right to have a relationship with their
children, and will have their lives essentially ruined and livelihood ended.
That may not be a death threat, as with many asylum cases, but it’s pretty
severe.
This is an administration that just set free a large number
of illegal aliens who had been incarcerated. They have sued the state of
Arizona for even asking people taken into custody for other infractions whether
they have legal status. “Everyone is welcome, and we hope you’ll be voting for
us soon,” is practically the announced immigration policy.
So why go to so much trouble to expel this particular family
that came here legally?
I’ve wondered if there was pressure from Germany, which is
an ally, and would appear somewhat embarrassed by the accusation of oppression
that the request for asylum implies. There may be something behind the scenes,
but there’s no mention of a request for extradition or any such thing in the
stories I’ve read. And it seems unlikely there would be such a request. Germany’s
stated purpose for the anti-homeschooling law is that they want to discourage
factions and separateness within the country; having the family leave means
problem solved.
Whether there’s some backroom discussion with Germany or
not, this prosecution by the federal government clearly exposes this
administration’s belief: there is no parental to right to see to the care,
control, and upbringing of children, nor is this administration willing to
protect any so-called parental rights.
Not all natural rights are spelled out in the first Ten
Amendments to the Constitution. The reason even those are amendments is that natural rights were understood and accepted, so
much so they didn’t need to be mentioned. It was fear that people might someday
become corrupt enough not to understand and accept the natural God-given rights
that led to the addition of the Bill of Rights. But it was so far from their
thinking that anyone would come to believe someone other than parents owned the
responsibility for raising the next generation that they didn’t even think to
spell it out. Parents choosing how to best raise their children is simply part
of a person’s life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Only in severe cases of
abuse and neglect would society (or government) have a role to step in to
protect the child.
But this administration is more corrupt than the founders
imagined. The insistence on challenging the Romeike decision is a way to codify
the administration’s belief that parents do not have rights concerning raising
their children—the government wants to make it clear that they believe they
have the right to control, to indoctrinate.
Inalienable rights cannot be given up. But just as people
can lose their freedom to slavery, any inalienable right can succumb to
usurpers if people do not stand strong against the tyrannists. Usually the loss
happens little by little. “Free” public schools have been used for the
incremental usurpation of parental rights. This administration is testing how
far they have already come toward the tyrannist plan to dictate what and how
children are taught.
When this federal government puts forth a curriculum (as it
has with Common Core), claiming it is best for all our children, it doesn’t
matter what is in the curriculum and whether it could be effective as a
teaching tool. Such curriculum must be
rejected, because the issue is parental rights—and we know that any curriculum
they provide comes from the worldview that parents do not have rights.
________________________________________________
* You can learn more on the Romeike case at these links: this story from 2010, this story from The Blaze March 15th, and this video with HSLDA, who are helping to defend the Romeikes.
No comments:
Post a Comment