The Right to an Education, Part II

Most of the world shares the Roman idea of rights, based on the concept of ius. These are essentially privileges granted by the state. "Rights," as historically conceived by most of the English speaking world has a very different history, drawing more on the Germanic concept of Rechte. In this sense, rights are inherent and unalienable. In "The Essential Rights and Liberties of Protestants" (1744), Elisha Williams writes,

Thus every Man having a natural Right to (or being the Proprietor of) his own Person and his own Actions and Labour and to what he can honestly acquire by his Labour, which we call Property; it certainly follows, that no Man can have a Right to the Person or Property of another...

The same sentiment is echoed in the Declaration of Independence. I have the right to my own person, action and labor and consequently to what I obtain by that labor. Intellectual endeavor is no less a fruit of labor than wages earned. Hence, the state rightly enacts and enforces copyright laws to protect the intellectual property of authors, inventors, etc. In so far as education is the result of my labor, it is a right. There is, however, no social responsibility to ensure I (or my children) achieve any particular level of education. Just as the very basic notion of property rights outlined in our Constitution does not require that the state provide property to the citizens.

The difficulty I had with this thought from the beginning is that education is not like other property. Physical property (such as my car) and intellectual property (such as this entry) can physically be taken and used by another against my will. I cannot very well be stripped of my education in the same manner.

Or can I? As the notion that rights entail responsibility on the part of society rather than the individual strengthens, our government has taken an increasing role in defining exactly what education is, how it can be attained and who can claim to be educated. Consider the following examples:

• Hillsdale, unlike many Christian colleges, has chosen to remain true to its founding principles, leading to the rejection of all state money, including the admission of students who accept federal financial aid programs in order to be able to maintain control of its curriculum. In 2000, Hillsdale's accreditation as a teaching college was in danger because it's "program, based on principles of Western culture, does not incorporate global perspectives by design." Its student body was not "culturally diverse." (Hillsdale keeps no records on race and gender, and does not ask these questions on admission.)

• Last year, the Association of Christian Schools International sued the University of California school system (a public system) over its rejection of Christian coursework at private, accredited schools. The University said that the texts would be fine as supplementary texts, but not as the main textbook.

• Things are beginning to change now, but consider the issue of homeschoolers taking the GED. Many choose to do this in order to enter the military or to fulfill university requirements. However, the GED also carries with it a "drop-out" stigma that should not be carried by homeschooled students.

Rights imply responsibility on the part of the individual, not society. The only role the government should have in regards to our basic rights is in securing them. If my life, liberty or property are endangered by another human being, it is the proper role of civil government to prosecute those individuals accordingly. It is not, however, the responsibility of civil government to maintain my health or guarantee me a certain standard of living. Nor is it the responsibility of civil government to guarantee me a minimum standard of education or define exactly what constitutes an education.

Part I may be found here. Thank you milehimamam and Jodi for your very thoughtful comments.

education, homeschooling, rights, education rights