Question: It is in the states best interest to be more involved in parenting, even to the point of controlling what is taught in the home.
Response: Addressing the question of whether it is in the states best interest to be more involved in parenting is completely dependent on circumstances and the magnitude of involvement the state will partake in. There are instances where intervention in the home are a must, as well as times when the state oversteps its boundaries. I find that both occur quite frequently and must be considered when forming an idea on the issue.
To start, instances where the state should intervene include the obvious cases of abuse and or illegal activities. This is an imperative that the state be involved and much a part of the lives of its people. Not only is it in the victim's best interest but the state's as it needs to protect the citizens within it's borders. In the cases with intervening on what is taught within the home, there are still cases where it is the states duty to intrude. When children are taught what is defined as illegal or societally destructive, an outlandish example being theft or murder is good, then the state must intervene to prevent this type of education in a child. However such instances cannot be directly found unless said children exhibit negative behavior outside the home. Therefore it is proper for one to say that yes, it is often in the states best interest to get deeply involved with the parenting of those within its jurisdiction.
However like all issues there is a second side to the coin. Often states, particularly those without democratic ideals, overstep the lines of ensuring public and citizen safety and aim to control and manipulate the home in negative ways. Invading the home to force propaganda or snuff religious or cultural traditions and learning is beyond the powers of a just government and is only characteristic of a state dipping into a lust for power. The dominance and subjugation of its people can only be attained when a state violates the home, and establishes its authority as completely superior to the family. Though an extreme example, the communist reign in China and Russia of the 20th century prove that when the state strips parents of the ability to teach their children and institutes a governmental education regime with a flaws morality that only approves what the government's actions are without option of critique. When the government encroaches upon the right of parents to teach ideals to their children they tread a fine line between oppressive behavior and duty.
In conclusion I can do nothing but affirm my initial explanation of the answer being based in circumstance. The state is both an ally and an enemy depending on motived and the degree of involvement.
