John Stossel is the woo-loving moronic co-host of the formerly not too bad but these days totally sucky tv “news” show 20-20.
It turns out Stossel is a libertarian home schooling supporter and reality denialist
Now, I should tell you that I am not against home schooling in principle. But I have come to believe that most home schooling setups involve either scary right wing fundamentalism or yahoo-istic libertarian political masterbation at the expense of the kids. But who cares what I think. What does John Stossel think?
The cat is finally out of the bag. A California appellate court, ruling that parents have no constitutional right to home-school their children, pinned its decision on this ominous quotation from a 47-year-old case, “A primary purpose of the educational system is to train schoolchildren in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare.”
There you have it; a primary purpose of government schools is to train schoolchildren “in loyalty to the state.” Somehow that protects “the public welfare” more than allowing parents to home-school their children,…
Justice H. Walter Croskey said, “California courts have held that under provisions in the Education Code, parents do not have a constitutional right to home-school their children.”
If that is the law in California, then Charles Dickens’ Mr. Bumble is right: “the law is an idiot.” …
The danger in having the Legislature clarify the law is that the Legislature is controlled by politicians sympathetic to the teachers’ union, which despises home-schooling. “Home-schoolers fear that any attempt to protect home-schooling would end up outlawing it,” writes Orange County Register columnist Steven Greenhut.
It reminds me of what New York Judge Gideon Tucker said in the 19th century, “No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.” …
There is more, but that gives you the flavor of Sotssel’s libertarian-think. If you must, the rest is here.