Comments on: Parental Rights and Same Sex Marriage

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 05:35:56 +0000

Barnette was decided in 1943 and Brown was in 1995 and is a First Circuit opinion.

Conveniently, Brown neglected to mention either Barnette or any of the common law on this issue. Other cases have even gone as far as to say that there is no case history, which I called them on in my case note. This is really one of those issues where the courts have intentionally ignored what is out there for them to cite, which is why I guess it makes sense that they all come from the coasts originally and are only now starting to get to the center of the country.

By: Jennifer Roback Morse

Jennifer Roback Morse — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 02:58:57 +0000

Curtis, what are the dates for the Brown case, and the WV v. Barnette case? what was their justification in the Brown case for departing from the precendents?
BTW, thanks for the endorsement of our student conference! Did you see that our BYU students are replicating the conference at their school? Very cool!

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 02:35:58 +0000

This problem in the schools is simply a result of judicial activism. It started (for the most part) with a case in Massachusetts called Brown v. Hot, Sexy and Safer Productions. There, the high school held an assembly in which the host promoted experimenting with premarital sex, conducted explicit demonstrations where the students were asked to participate and many other appalling things. The parents complained asking for both damages and injunctive relief. In the holding of that case (in a nutshell) the court said that the school has a superior right to that of the parents on what is deemed to have educational value. This has been the trend in the Federal courts across the country ever since.

What is sad is that the modern courts have ignored both judicial history (courts of old consistantly gave the parents the right to opt their children out of ANY program, regardless of whether the objection was religious or not) and it ignores the Supreme Court precedents.

The most applicable Supreme Court case by far is called West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette. There, the state had created a mandatory policy that kids must say the pledge. It’s purpose was to promote patriotism in the students (sound similar? the state’s purpose now is to promote tolerance). Some Jehovah’s witness parents objected to this because they felt that it put country above God. There, the court held (again, in a nutshell) that the parents had the right to opt their children out of the requirement to say the pledge based upon free speech. The Court (in dicta) also recognized the fundamental right of the parent to raise their children.

Finally, to promote Dr. Morse’s student conference, I’m one of those students who attended. I’ve been productive after her conference. With a small amount of help from William Duncan, I’ve published a case note on this topic (to be in print in September).

By: Jennifer Roback Morse

Jennifer Roback Morse — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:38:04 +0000

Marty
the whole thrust of the sexual revolution has been to separate sexual activity from child-bearing from marriage. Of course, this cannot be done, unless we turn sex into a sterile activity. I believe this is where the culture and the legal system are heading: sex is normatively a sterile activity. Procreation is thrown in as an after-thought for people who happen to like that sort of thing.

By: Chairm

Chairm — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:09:08 +0000

There is an obvious conflict over priorities.

That conflict is a legitimate topic to raise during a single issue campaign about the laws governing our most pro-child social institution.

Marriage has many overflow effects. The primacy of parental responsiblity for the well-being and education of their children is one such overflow. If we take that out of marriage, or if we beaten it down into smashed bits and pieces, then, the lone parent or unwed parents will be made far more vulnerable to the excesses inherent in the exercise of governmental authority.

I guess it is like this: if our social institutions do not occupy their proper place in our civilizatons, then, government will expand to occupy it for us.

By: Marty

Marty — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 03:53:41 +0000

Might be instructive to ask them, which should a kid learn first: that all babies come from one man and one woman, or that “you can love anyone sexually”, and babies come from a technicality.