Standardized educations should certainly be offered, but this education should be an option, with the possibility to opt-out.

Immediate disagreement from me, for reasons I have already laid out: the child does not have the sufficiently developed mind to make a reasoned decision about this by his or herself. Therefore it would be the parents making the decision. If the parents opt out, therefore, the child has their right to a decent education taken away from them.

Where is the child's rights in this scenario? You're all for personal liberty, yet here in one sentence you completely strip a child of shitty parents of their right to learn. That is simply not liberty.

but if the child has conviction enough to deny the advisement of his parent, then the parent should be essentially disregarded as an influence on the situation.

Again, the child does not have a sufficiently developed mind to make that call. This is where your approach goes off the rails. Very few children would actively override their parents decision to forgo education, they simply can't know any better. This is not liberty, it is not fairness.

You sound like a communist.

Well I'm not, so there :P

You're speaking as if the will of the individual is not important

I am sorry but this is exactly what you are doing by placing the fate of children entirely in the hands of their parents - which 9 times of 10 is fine, but the remaining children of shitty parents never get a chance. You are not successfully advancing personal liberty if you are not offering a lifeline to children born into shitty situations of which they have zero control.