I believe Mr. Norris is wrong in calling for a constitutional amendment to protect homeschooling. In the 1990's Michael Farris was trying to get a Parental Rights and Responsibilities Act passed. It didn't, fortunately. One of the people opposing his proposal was Dr. Charles Rice of Notre Dame. Now Farris is trying for a federal constitutional amendment. Parental rights have always been considered 10th amendment issues, that is, under the purview of the states. As soon as you start legislating on a federal level, you invite federal courts to start defining parental rights and education. Who says their definition is going to match yours?! This is the WRONG, WRONG,WRONG way to go folks!I'll try to get some links posted to my blog in a day or so you can start researching the issue yourselves. My biggest fear about the present situation in California is that it will snowball into a movement for passage of a Parental Rights Amendment. We need to remember the Catholic principle of subsidiarity here--solve problems at the level closest to them! Our right to educate our children is from God, not any Constitution. Let's not be like the Israelites begging for a king (a constitutional amendment) with all the problems that that will then entail for us.
Connie's Daughter's blog is http://marthaandmary.blogspot.com/I agree that we do not need a constitutional amendment. I'm not for messing with the Constitution any more than we have to.
Post a Comment