Posted on 08/27/2009 11:21:03 PM PDT by kingattax
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) has asked a New Hampshire court to reconsider its decision to order a 10-year-old home-schooled girl into public school.
"Parents have a fundamental right to make educational choices for their children," said ADF-allied attorney John Anthony Simmons. "In this case, the court is illegitimately altering a method of education that the court itself admits is working."
The parents of the girl are divorced, and the mother has been home-schooling her. In the process of renegotiating the terms of a parenting plan for the girl, the guardian ad litem concluded that the girl "appeared to reflect her mother's rigidity on questions of faith" and that the girl's interests "would be best served by exposure to a public school setting."
Judge Lucinda V. Sadler approved the recommendation and issued the order July 14.
"The New Hampshire Supreme Court itself has specifically declared, 'Home education is an enduring American tradition and right,' " said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson. "There is clearly and without question no legitimate legal basis for the court's decision, and we trust it will reconsider its conclusions."
Mike Donnelly, staff attorney at the Home School Legal Defense Association, agreed this is "not the place for the courts to be inserting themselves."
Bingo, I think that's the idea. After all, Hitler sent the Jews (and the Christians who hid them) to the death camps and it was all perfectly legal.
Geez. Whatever happened to “Live Free or Die” New Hampshire??
Unless there’s a missing piece, that mom should challenge this with both barrels. Guardian ad Litem is strictly a volunteer position, NO training, NO professional degree needed, who talks to the child and gives his (the GAL’s) opinion to the judge.
Where’s HSLDA in all of this? And why are they not involved?
No, but thank God, their rulings still stand.
"Progressive" voters.
Unfortunately, you are right.
At my son’s request I am pulling him out of his senior year at pubic school next week and will home school him instead.
He’s tired of being a prison-zoo school.
“Family courts are notoriously pro mother.”
They are also notoriously anti-homeschooling. By the way it doesnt matter what their religious beliefs are, they are protected by our Constitution.
Does it matter what the religious beliefs are? Are they not protected under the Constitution just because they may be weird?
You can interpret a verse as you see fit, but no where is there a verse that says a divorced woman and man are considered married in the eyes of God if there is a child involved.
If not then I won't bother showing you the verses.
Since we live under Grace, the old testament punishment for adultery is not applicable.
Alot of people like to use the wives submit to your husband verse. They forget that the husband is commanded to love his wife as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for it. This man cheated on his wife and abandoned her. He is not the spiritual head of this household. Just because God gave us our rulers, sometimes they abuse their power. Just because something happens (this girl is ordered to PS) doesnt mean that it is God’s will.
They also forget that fathers are commanded to not provoke their children to wrath. Has this father taken his daughter’s wishes into consideration?
The Biblical punishment for Adultery is Death is it not?
Show me a verse that rescinds that law?
Eventually that sin will result in your death, so if the Civil authorities won't kill you for it, God will certainly judge you for it. What are the wages of sin?
Did God repeal THAT verse too?
I think you know what the other poster means. We are not commanded to stone adulterers to death under the new convenant. Christ rescued the woman caught in adultery and told the one without sin to cast the first stone.
Yeah. If this man had been a real man, he would have not ruined his marriage. Men don’t like to hear that they are to love their wives so that they would die for them. All they want to hear is that the wife is to be subservient and do everything he wishes. If men led as Christ led the Church, there would not be so much divorce.
That certainly isn't in this article. Is that an assumption on your part or do you have first hand knowledge?
And while that verse does require that the husbands love their wives, there is no escape clause for the woman to refuse to submit to the husband merely because she does not believe he loves her.
If the wife is submissive to Christ, she will be submissive to her husband. If she doesn't submit to Christ, then she probably wouldn't submit to her husband either.
Being a Christian is hard work, is it not? Surrendering your ego is probably harder than living without chocolate.
The information about his cheating was from another article that I read about this case. I didnt read this particular article. If a husband abandons his wife, she must submit to Christ. She no longer has a husband to submit to. I am submissive to my husband but he didn’t cheat on me and divorce me either.
John 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not undr the law, but under grace.
Yes, there are consequences to sin. Since we are all born into sin, we will all die, up to the rapture.
I do think we have gotten too soft on the worldly consequences for transgressions. Our churches have gotten too soft, definitely. But Christ did set the example for us in forgiving.
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.