Homestead mailing list

["Lynda" <lurine AT com-pair.net>]

The information below was posted to a Missouri list.  A short reply was sent 
back about the nonsensical 'tyranny always having been secular.'  The list 
started with the Taliban.

Can a Constitutional Amendment Protect Parental Rights?
http://homeedmag.com/HEM/253/takingcharge.html

Lynda
========================================
from Mo. state rep. Cynthia Davis:

Parental Rights

The proper role of government is to protect our rights.  The
constitution is the place to state those rights.  Just think about all
the times we have been spared from bad court decisions, bad laws and
bad regulations because our U.S. Constitution includes the right to
freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to peacefully
assemble, and freedom to bear arms.  However, the Missouri
Constitution does not say that parents have the right to raise their
own children.  While it may seem like a “no-brainer,” we ought not to
take anything for granted in 2009.

If we do not define parental rights today, it may be too late to try
to do it in the future.  Our attitudes and constitutional posture
toward families in our state will affect how families are respected
and treated in the long run. That is why I sponsored HJR16, which
could become part of our Missouri constitution if our legislature puts
in on the ballot for 2010 and the people vote for it.  Here is the
text:

________

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring 
therein:

           That at the next general election to be held in the state
of Missouri, on Tuesday next following the first Monday in November,
2010, or at a special election to be called by the governor for that
purpose, there is hereby submitted to the qualified voters of this
state, for adoption or rejection, the following amendment to article I
of the Constitution of the state of Missouri:

           Section A. Article I, Constitution of Missouri, is amended
by adding one new section, to be known as section 34, to read as
follows:

           Section 34. That parents and legal guardians have a
natural and fundamental right to direct the care, education, and
upbringing of their children, and that no government action shall
burden, abridge, or hinder this natural, fundamental right unless it
is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the
least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental
interest.
________

Do children belong to the state or to the family?  A struggle is
emerging between the family and the state on this question.  “The
dream of the socialists has always been to reduce the relationship
between parents and children so that children grow up with an
intuitive loyalty to the state.  Tyranny has always been secular,”
according to Rabbi Daniel Lapin, an author and host of a weekly radio
program.

A unique relationship exists between parents and their children and
which requires parents to protect, guide and direct them.  Imagine if
our cities or our state passed laws prohibiting parents from training
their children in the family’s religious traditions.  Without a
constitutional amendment stating that parents have the right to raise
their children, parents have no protection against laws being passed
that remove our ability to direct religious teaching, discipline or
even the feeding of our own children.

While this resolution may not make any changes in specific state
statutes, it may act as a retaining wall to prevent further erosion of
our parental rights in future legislation.  The constitution is the
law that the people write for themselves.  Let’s give it the authority
to protect our families.

To learn more about this subject, click here:  Wallbuilders Archives:
United Nations and Parental Rights. Scroll down to the Feb. 2, 2009
program, and click on “download MP3” in order to listen to the
interview with Rabbi Daniel Lapin.