Your respecful reply is very much appreciated. You have succeeded where supposedly neutral journalists failed - to discuss what happened plainly and objectively.
You have a rather well thought out perspective as well as knowledge of the course approval procedure. Are you affiliated with the University?
You know, I could only go on what I heard from the sources I looked at. The articles I read on both sides were designed to persuade me that the other side is wrong, and of course, I brought my own opinion to the table.
A key element for me is the understanding about the "primary text". I guess as a homeschooler I don't always have a "primary" text.
Frankly, your explanation also clarifies for me why our online Christian school frequently includes secular offerings in its science and elective courses like sociology and psychology that seem out of character for its mission statement. But I was on the site today doing some planning and scheduling and noticed that the courses are accredited.
Can I have a light bulb, please?
I'm not a journalist, just a blogging mom who is concerned about this ruling being twisted in the future to further prevent the Christian worldview - including intelligent design - from seeing the light of day anywhere on college campuses, ever. Couple that with an innate distrust of home schooling on the part of some state schools especially, and you have the potential for increased discrimination against Christian home schooled students rising out of this ruling.
This concern is neither new nor unfounded. If you have never seen the discussion on this website about discrimination against homeschooled students on the part of colleges, I hope you will take a few minutes and read this discussion from The Chronicle of Higher Education from 2003.
Thanks again for your response - and for including your name. :) You still aren't quite revealed, but you are not anonymous anymore, either.