richard_dawkins_-_the_god_delusion

330 THE GOD DELUSION
it is to allow the Amish to educate their own children in their own
way, and protect them from the corrupting influence of modernity.
But, we surely want to ask, shouldn't the children themselves have
some say in the matter?
The Supreme Court was asked to rule in 1972, when some
Amish parents in Wisconsin withdrew their children from high
school. The very idea of education beyond a certain age was
contrary to Amish religious values, and scientific education
especially so. The State of Wisconsin took the parents to court,
claiming that the children were being deprived of their right to an
education. After passing up through the courts, the case eventually
reached the United States Supreme Court, which handed down a
split (6:1) decision in favour of the parents. 142 The majority opinion,
written by Chief Justice Warren Burger, included the following: 'As
the record shows, compulsory school attendance to age 16 for
Amish children carries with it a very real threat of undermining the
Amish community and religious practice as they exist today; they
must either abandon belief and be assimilated into society at large,
or be forced to migrate to some other and more tolerant region.'
Justice William O. Douglas's minority opinion was that the
children themselves should have been consulted. Did they really
want to cut short their education? Did they, indeed, really want to
stay in the Amish religion? Nicholas Humphrey would have gone
further. Even if the children had been asked and had expressed a
preference for the Amish religion, can we suppose that they would
have done so if they had been educated and informed about the
available alternatives? For this to be plausible, shouldn't there be
examples of young people from the outside world voting with their
feet and volunteering to join the Amish? Justice Douglas went further
in a slightly different direction. He saw no particular reason to
give the religious views of parents special status in deciding how far
they should be allowed to deprive their children of education. If
religion is grounds for exemption, might there not be secular beliefs
that also qualify?
The majority of the Supreme Court drew a parallel with some of
the positive values of monastic orders, whose presence in our
society arguably enriches it. But, as Humphrey points out, there is
a crucial difference. Monks volunteer for the monastic life of their