Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK  Could it be considered 'dangerous' to neglect a child in not at least attempting to teach a child to read or some kind of skill that will allow them to provide for themselves when they get older? |
Sure, it could be considered. And so we have all this prescriptive govt interference, "for the children," "for the good of society." But is it in the long-term interest of a free people to have a govt that continually micro-manages their lives? If they start by telling you what you have to teach your kids, soon they will take your schools away and teach the kids themselves what they want them to learn.
I doubt it can be successfully argued that it is "dangerous" to not teach to read, or other education, in anything approaching the level of not providing food/clothing/shelter. That's not to say that governments don't argue that very thing--clearly they do, and take it upon themselves to create, e.g., "outcome based education" etc., trying to ensure they have a continuing population of drones. Ironically, it seems that eventually the same policy-makers will argue that TOO MUCH education is equally dangerous!
The question for us is: should OUR government attempt to "produce" outcomes via mandates? Our govt was created to be "negative," maximizing individual liberty. It has become "directive," bossing us around. It took over schooling, when most Americans were already literate, and most parents sought at least a minimal education for their children. Today, with all their "mandates" and "directives" and centralized (and expensive) controls, kids don't learn in 13 years what our grandparents mastered in 8, and we have a greater % of functional illiterates.
Historians will look at our age and study how the freest society (maybe ever) abandoned God (that is, Protestant Christianity) and liberty, both in parallel.
Quote:
|
Is there 'general equity' that parents must provide some kind of education for their children in 1 Tim 5:9? Is a parent who does not attempt to teach their child to read 'providing for his own'?
|
Is this a moral question, or a civil or criminal one? What if the answers to these questions are "yes"? Are you assuming that the civil govt assumes a coercive duty, just because parental govt is derelict? I do not.
__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI
Made both Lord and Christ--Jesus, the Destroyer
Acts 2:36 - 1 Cor. 10:9-10 & 15:22-26 - Hebrews 2:9-15 - 1 John 3:8 - James 4:12
When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --