School choice as a moral versus legal right

If the parental "rights" underlying Rick's school choice argument (see below) emanate from a moral understanding of the human person in relation to society, rather than from a non-negotiable entitlement recognized within our legal system, I have no problem with such "rights talk." I do believe that a morality-driven conception of educational choice, in terms similar to those expressed by Rick, is a welcome and persuasive entry into the public debate over school vouchers. An argument framed in terms of moral rights, though, is far different than a request that courts recognize school choice as a legal right, whether conceived of as an aspect of religious liberty or otherwise.

I don't think we're left with a stark choice between parents as rights-holders (in a positive liberty sense) and an oppressive state monopoly, with no middle ground. Instead, I see parents operating within a meaningful sphere in which they are legally empowered to block state intervention into their children's education. Outside that sphere, they are politically empowered to win the hearts and minds of the surrounding community, probably through advocacy steeped in moral considerations, to secure a claim on public educational resources that is consistent with the common good. Certainly I'd rather have parents making choices for their own children than some faceless collective making choices for all children, but I do think that parents' power to choose must be understood against the background needs of the community, and I'm not sure that a legal right (as positive liberty) allows that sort of choice.

To the extent that Rick shares this conception of moral versus legal rights, at least in the school choice context, we are in complete agreement.

Rob