How Rights Get Destroyed

A recent opinion piece at CNN.com addresses several bills that were introduced in the 2023 Texas legislative session, including a requirement that the Ten Commandments be posted in every government school classroom. The article correctly notes that this is part of a decades long battle by religionists to impose Christian ideas through the schools. The article concludes by illustrating (albeit unintentionally) how rights get destroyed:

And while these Texas bills may not become law this year, the proliferation of bills mandating Christianity suggest that this broader social project remains a priority for Republicans — a critical component of the new infrastructure of restrictions rooted in a belief that the United States is a conservative Christian nation, an identity that the law should safeguard at every turn, regardless of what rights get dismantled in the process.

To the author, the issue isn’t protecting the rights of all individuals. She accepts the premise that somebody’s right must be violated, and the only issue up for debate is whose. Her solution to rights-violating bills is a different set of rights-violating bills.

Rights pertain to freedom of action. They protect our freedom to act as we judge best, so long as we respect the freedom of others to act as they judge best. By their very nature, government schools violate the rights of individuals. This is true no matter what ideas and values are taught in those schools.

If government schools were abolished, this would be a non-issue. Parents would be free to send their children to the school that teaches the values and ideas the parents agree with. If they desire a school that posts the Ten Commandments, they would be free to send their child to such a school. If they wanted a school that teaches “woke” ideas, that too would be their prerogative. In either case, and everything in between, other parents, politicians, and education bureaucrats could not use coercion to mandate the values and ideas students learn.

The author isn’t opposed to politicians and bureaucrats dictating curriculum. She just wants schools to teach the ideas that she advocates, whether parents agree or not. When basic premises aren’t questioned, rights get destroyed.

Similar Posts

  • A Very Bad Lesson

    This was originally posted on Live Oaks on March 5, 2010. Comments have not been migrated. On Thursday, college students across the nation protested funding cuts to state colleges. The students are upset because they are taking on more debt and in some cases, having to choose between eating or buying books. Not surprisingly, the…

  • When One Drops Context

    An editorial in the school paper for the University of Texas at Arlington provides an interesting example of the types of conclusions that can result when one drops context. The editorial, which opposes school choice, argues that without education standards imposed by government officials, parents will be given the responsibility of holding schools accountable. Without…

  • Public Education and the Poor

    This was originally posted on Live Oaks on November 9, 2010. Comments have not been migrated. It is commonly argued that without public education the poor would have few, if any educational opportunities. Without public education, those born into poverty would have little opportunity to escape, and the poor would remain poor generation after generation….

  • |

    The Real Tragedy of Bullying

    This was originally posted on Live Oaks on October 11, 2010. Comments have not been migrated. An OpEd in Sunday’s Chronicle tells us that we must protect kids from bullying. Citing a growing number of suicides by bullied teenagers, Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, and Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, write: The…