Posted on 05/25/2006 4:09:21 PM PDT by wagglebee
PURCELLVILLE, Virginia, May 25, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A home schooling association is warning that the U.S., and even more so other countries, faces the threat that home schooling may be deemed illegal due to international law.
The Home School Legal Defense Association's (HSLDA) Chairman and General Counsel, Michael Farris, warns that even though the U.S. has never ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the convention may still be binding on citizens because of activist judges.
According to a new "interpretation" of what is known as "customary international law," some U.S. judges have ruled that, even though the U.S. Senate and President have never ratified the Convention, it is still binding on American parents. "In the 2002 case of Beharry v. Reno, one federal court said that even though the Convention was never ratified, it still has an 'impact on American law'," Farris explained. "The fact that virtually every other nation in the world has adopted it has made it part of customary international law, and it means that it should be considered part of American jurisprudence."
Under the Convention, severe limitations are placed on a parent's right to direct and train their children. As explained in a 1993 Home School Court Report by the HSLDA, under Article 13, parents could be subject to prosecution for any attempt to prevent their children from interacting with material they deemed unacceptable. Under Article 14, children are guaranteed "freedom of thought, conscience and religion" - in other words, children have a legal right to object to all religious training. And under Article 15, the child has a right to "freedom of association." "If this measure were to be taken seriously, parents could be prevented from forbidding their child to associate with people deemed to be objectionable companions," the HSLDA report explained.
Farris explains that, in 1995, "the United Kingdom was deemed out of compliance" with the Convention "because it allowed parents to remove their children from public school sex-education classes without consulting the child". Farris argues that, "by the same reasoning, parents would be denied the ability to homeschool their children unless the government first talked with their children and the government decided what was best. This committee would even have the right to determine what religious teaching, if any, served the child's best interest."
Farris suggests that there are several solutions to the dangers presented by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child for Americans. "First, Congress has the power to define customary international law. It also has the power to modify the jurisdiction of federal courts. Congress needs to address this issue of judicial tyranny by enacting legislation that limits the definition of customary international law to include only provisions of treaties that Congress has ratified."
"Second, Congress could pass an amendment to the Constitution, stating explicitly that no provision of any international agreement can supersede the constitutional rights of an American citizen. Two such amendments have been proposed in Congress, but neither was ratified."
"Third, the specific threat to parental rights can be solved by putting a clear parents' rights amendment into the black and white text of the United States Constitution."
In countries like the UK and Canada, which have already ratified the Convention, it is less clear what measures can be adopted, although similar measures are likely possible.
Read the 1993 Home School Court Report by HSLDA:
http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/unicef/homeschoolalert.h...
See related LifeSiteNews.com and Interim coverage:
New UN Convention a Threat to Canadians
http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/unicef/newunconvention.h...
Focus On The Family Calls Un Child Convention "A Danger"
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2001/jun/01060703.html
U.S. Homeschooling Parents May be Forced to Teach Against Their Moral Principles
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/oct/03100607.html
This could backfire in some ways. There are kids I know who WANT to be homeschooled and their parents won't. What happens in those cases? What about homeschooled kids who want to continue to be homeschooled? I haven't run across a whole lot of kids who really want to go to public school anyway. Most homeschool kids I know like it.
New World Order bump
Well---looks like we've got our work cut out for us. After we clean up the law schools, we must tackle the education schools, the medical schools, the journalism schools, etc etc.
Good thing there's a lot of us to get all this done--LOL!
Hear, Hear!
ping - I'm feeling ill.
The WHO, through the UN wants to take our supplements and now they want to take your rights as parents, too. What's next?
I actually know of some, but that's for another thread. This would be pretty stupid--international law for homeschooling???? HUH??? I support not having government at all in homeschooling--regulations, money, whatever.
But no matter what happens, parents should maintain their right to raise their child as they see fit. I know my parents would have no matter what the circumstances. They knew they had that choice from the start.
Since when did International Law have authority inside the borders of a sovereign country?
the convention may still be binding on citizens because of activist judges.Another silver lining will be the identification and removal from the bench of activist judges. The Congress has to ratify treaties, not judges, and any judge who attempts that has to go.
Whenever I hear about the UN's "Rights of the Child", I think of this poem. You may have seen it before. Enjoy! :-)
ROTFLOL!!!!!! I hadn't seen that before, but it's good.
Kids have *rights*? Sure, move out, get your own apartment, if anyone would rent to a kid. Do your own shopping, cooking, laundry. Let them support themselves and see how far the money goes.
It reminds me of the times my kids have said to me "I can't wait till I'm grown up and can do what I want to." If they only knew.
HA!
I'll get it started :-)
ping
Interesting quote -- where can I see the context? Do you have a link, or a citation? Can I see it online?
Alexander Zinoviev, "Yawning Heights", at the beginning - page 1 or 2, IIRC. Amazon or Alibris would have it, and I am not sure you could see it online.
Identify, impeach, and remove for cause every single federal judge and Associate Justice who agrees with that judge.
Binding U.S. citizens with extraneous law "just because I said so" is totally unconstitutional and an abuse of both power and office. If it isn't judicial misconduct to hand down something like that, then I don't know what is, other than getting drunk and following someone into the ladies' room.
Thanks.
bump for later reading.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.