Section 1. The God-given right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right which may not be abridged by the United States or any state.
Section 2. The balancing test applicable to other fundamental rights may be used to balance a claim of parental rights provided that the government establishes its interest by proper evidence in each case.
2007-01-03
08:16:53
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
You can read more about parental rights and this proposed amendment at
www.hslda.org or www.homeschoolheartbeat.com
2007-01-03
08:18:27 ·
update #1
All of our rights are "God-Given"
The principles of the form of law used in the U.S., common law, are based upon the Bible.
The Declaration of Independence which establishes the basis upon which our rights are claimed says that we have been "endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights".
2007-01-03
08:24:29 ·
update #2
While well intentioned, I believe this would fall under the 9th, and/or possibly the 10th, Amendment. Though the 9th is basically overlooked as irrelevant to anything.
The Constitution essentially says the government cannot do anything that is not specifically allowed therein. However, it is mostly ignored and sidestepped by legal creativity and the use of things such as the Commerce Clause to allow pretty much anything to fall under Federal control. So how did there come to be a Federal Department of Education? And why is it under the Executive Branch of the Federal Government?
Does this congressional finding appear somewhat contradictory to you? If 3 and 4 are true, what makes 9 and 10 necessary?
"(3) parents have the primary responsibility for the education of their children, and States, localities, and private institutions have the primary responsibility for supporting that parental role;
(4) in our Federal system, the primary public responsibility for education is reserved respectively to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States;
...
(9) Presidential and public consideration of issues relating to Federal education programs is hindered by the present organizational position of education programs in the executive branch of the Government; and
(10) there is no single, full-time, Federal education official directly accountable to the President, the Congress, and the people."
-- http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/20/usc_sec_20_00003401----000-.html
My children are homeschooled and I don't feel that I need a Constitutional Amendment to tell me that I have a right to do so.
2007-01-03 08:42:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
On Section 1 you need to add at the end "without due process".
Section 2 is way too vague because there are dozens of balancing tests courts use for "other fundamental rights." That doesn't limit balancing tests to to those used only where children are involved.
I used to terminate parental rights----it's not an easy job and not an action that is regarded lightly by the State.
Very vague, very vague.......so, no I would not support that amendment--but, if it was re-written the correct way, I probably would b/c I do think TPR is a quasi-criminal proceeding since all involved have the potential to lose a fundamental right, ie, to parent and to be parented.
2007-01-03 08:23:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by kathylouisehall 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
No because A: Constitutional rights are rights we the people have given ourselves and B: The state (which is the people) has an interest in seeing to it that grossly negligent or abusive parents have their rights abridged or taken away completely in cases that warrant such action. You know, every fool wants to amend the Constitution for this or that pet issue. This is a serious document. Now if you had asked, "Do you favor a law that says that one can home school a child or discipline a child the way that they see fit?" Then my answer might be, "Yes, provided that it can be shown that the child is not being abused, neglected or poorly educated."
2016-05-22 23:33:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. Just because a person can procreate does not mean they are justified in doing whatever they wish to their children. They still need to follow the law of the land.
2007-01-03 08:20:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Crystal P 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Not without all potential parents submitting to a competency exam PRIOR to having children. If they are deemed fit to raise kids THEN they can do so without government interference.
2007-01-03 08:31:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Goose&Tonic 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
No, any amendment with 'God-given right' sounds theocratical.
The is the USA.
2007-01-03 08:20:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
YES...........TO SECTION 1. & NO ......TO SEC. 2 . IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT THIS BALANCING ACT IS........
2007-01-03 08:20:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Dave F 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
I won't support anything that changes our constitution.
2007-01-03 08:20:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by Ricky T 6
·
1⤊
2⤋