[looscnnn]

Not withstanding that it is wrong, consider the following:

Isn't this infringing on his freedom of speech? Also, isn't it abridging his religious beliefs? Just because they do not have an officially sanctioned religion, doesn't "fundamentalist" Mormonism count as a religion? What about what happens in a person's home is of no business of the government (established in the case of the two Texas gay men)? Technically, couldn't he say that making polygamy illegal is establishing religion (which is unconstitutional)?

Just some food for thought (and discussion).

[.cnI redruM]

I'm not sure where a true libertarian can object to a religion that sacrifices chihuahua dogs by the light of the full moon. I mean, if they don't shank Taco Bell's Chihuahua instead of their own and if they don't impel people to attend against their will, what's the big stink?

[BlueNgold]

The issue is legitimate because of the joint custody arrangement. You have a division of thought on bringing up the child, but it is in the extreme. One of the opposing views runs afoul of the law. This is not a simple matter of 'Catholic vs. protestant' .. this is a matter of indoctrination into an illegal activity. Were there no division of custody and the parents agreed then the courts would have no say. However, the complainant, as a joint custody holder, has standing. It is not a matter of government interference, it is a matter of a parent, unable to adequately resolve a custodial issue, addressing the courts for resolution.

[FITZ]

Isn't this infringing on his freedom of speech?

Technically other things like teaching her about incest would be also.