Brazilian Families Want Legal Homeschooling
A group of families made a 12-hour trip to be in Brasilia, Brazil’s capital city, to attend a vote in the Brazilian Congress on homeschooling. The vote was postponed, but the presence of these families and their children touched the hearts of many congressional representatives.
These families, who were sponsored by ANED (Associação Nacional de Educação Domiciliar, National Home Education Association), promise to be in Brasilia again next Wednesday, when there will be a possible new vote.
The current Brazilian government is controlled by the socialist Workers’ Party, and it is hostile to homeschooling. The past social democratic government, of the Marxist, former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, was similarly hostile.
The ideological opposition by the Workers’ Party is reminiscent of the Workers’ Party in Germany some 80 years ago. In fact, this was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, also known as Nazi Party, which banned homeschooling in Germany in the 1930s. After the ban, national socialist dictator Hitler said, “The Youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are still unperverted and therefore unspoiled. This Reich stands, and it is building itself up for the future, upon its youth. And this new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing.”
Hitler’s ban is in place in Germany even today. Germany, which is tolerant of many kinds of radical Muslim practices and customs from its Islamic immigrants, has been radically intolerant of every homeschooling practice of Christian parents.
Germany is a long way from one of the most important founders of the modern German language, Martin Luther, who said, “I am much afraid that schools will prove to be the great gates of hell unless they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures, engraving them in the hearts of youth.”
About the Brazilian government, why should it imitate the German government behavior against Christian parents? About the Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, who was an admirer of the Soviet Union, why should she keep a ban on homeschooling? Why should her administration persecute Christian parents who homeschool in a Christian way?
The Soviet Union no more exists. In modern Russia, homeschooling is legal. In my pro-life and pro-family meeting in Moscow two months ago, one of the most prominent homeschool leaders in the world told me that Russia has several homeschool curriculums. In today’s Russia, it is not a crime to homeschool. Why in Brazil is it?
Pat Robertson, of CBN News, reported that Russia “is one of the freest nations in which to homeschool.”
“We have complete freedom of home education in Russia, in terms of legality,” Pavel Parfentiev, a family rights advocate in Russia, said.
“The Russian Federation is sort of a champion of human rights in this particular area, so of course I think it is a good example for both Germany and Sweden where home educators are persecuted,” he said to CBN News.
If Rousseff admired the old Russia much, why should she admire new Russia less? She should allow homeschooling and even imitate a Russian ban on gay propaganda to protect children.
She should not imitate Germany, which is intolerant of homeschooling by Christian parents, but extremely tolerant of Islamic radicalism.
Rousseff should make a trip to Russia and learn basic lessons of freedom, protection and educational choices for children.
She should ban homosexual propaganda, not homeschooling, to minors.
Portuguese version of this article: Famílias brasileiras querem legalização da educação escolar em casa
Top 6 on BarbWire.com
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.