Friday, August 28, 2009

Homeschooled Christian Needs a "Religion to Suit Her Needs"

http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=5050#

A new Hampshire Court recently handed down this court brief described above, wherein they recommend that a homeschooled child, who meets or exceeds their every standard for social and educational progress, be enrolled in Government-run schools. The court saw that she held her religious beliefs strongly, and decided that this was not correct for a ten-year old. She needs--in the court's view--to be confronted with multiple religions, so that she can decide which one is best for her.
Besides being an obvious overstepping of government authority, the whole situation is a ridiculous (but scary) example of judicial activism. One judge decides that a young girl, though perfectly normal in every other way, is too Christian for her age, and rules she should go to public school. How twisted is that? If a judge can decide that, then a judge could find that I am too firm of a Catholic teacher, and have to teach more alternate religions. The possibilities are--scarily--endless. I am not sure this brief would hold up in a higher court, but I am seriously disturbed by the thought that such a judge is in a position of power at all. This whole situation arises from a divorce case, which in New Hampshire involves a government employee, called a "Marital Master." The Marital Master is the point of contact for divorce or custody decisions by courts, and has a significant influence on court decisions. That a court would accept such an opinion as the one expressed above, and attempt to enforce it, should make any person of sincere belief concerned. According to the report, the guardian ad litem of this child (whose parents are divorced) was not happy with the strongly held beliefs of the child, and the Marital Master thus made the recommendation to the court to have the child placed in public school. So much for allowing parents to be the natural educators of their children, or for freedom of religion, or freedom of speech, or freedom of most kinds. Licentiousness is the norm, but moral or ideological conviction is a bad for us.

-Amator

1 comment:

Matthew Bowman said...

This is a blatant violation of the First Amendment; not just the separation clause but also on free speech. Even a minor has the right to practice his religion and the right to free speech to express it.

Additionally, if the government is not supposed to judge religion in education, then there is no possible standing for this case even beyond the unConstitutional aspects.

I hope Judicial Watch gets involved in this.