InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

extelecom

04/16/03 2:53 PM

#14998 RE: Tom K #14996

You are probably correct about booting bad teachers. Given the shortages they have, I can see how it happens. I get mad everytime I see some Sports Idiot or some CEO being paid Zillions of dollars and we have Police and teachers barely scraping along... Our Whole Society places the wrong emphasis on things... Should a WWF wrestler make more money than an outstanding Teacher?
icon url

extelecom

04/16/03 3:02 PM

#15003 RE: Tom K #14996

I just googled this from the web.. I had heard several years ago that Minnesota or somewhere up their har propsed Parental Licensing at one time and that is what put the idea in my head...Sorry for all the caps, but that's the way it is...
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/2132.htm
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
TESTIMONY OF SENATOR CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
OCTOBER 26, 1995


MR. CHAIRMAN, I AM PLEASED TO BE HERE TODAY AS YOU BEGIN HEARINGS ON THE PARENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ACT OF 1995. THIS BILL REAFFIRMS THE RIGHT OF PARENTS TO DIRECT THE UPBRINGING OF THEIR CHILDREN. WHILE MOST PARENTS ASSUME THIS RIGHT IS PROTECTED, SOME LOWER COURTS HAVE ACTED TO LIMIT THIS BASIC FREEDOM. THE BILL I INTRODUCED WITH MR. LARGENT AND MR. PARKER WILL PROTECT THE FAMILY FROM UNWARRANTED INTRUSIONS BY THE GOVERNMENT.
WHILE THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT EXPLICITLY ADDRESS THE PARENT-- CHILD RELATIONSHIP, THE SUPREME COURT CLEARLY REGARDS THE RIGHT OF PARENTS TO DIRECT THE UPBRINGING OF THEIR CHILDREN AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT UNDER THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, SUCH AS FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND RELIGION RECEIVE THE HIGHEST LEGAL PROTECTION.
TWO CASES IN THE 1920s AFFIRMED THE COURT'S HIGH REGARD FOR THE INTEGRITY OF THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP. IN MEYER v. NEBRASKA, THE COURT DECLARED THAT THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT "[W]ITHOUT DOUBT, ... DENOTES NOT MERELY FREEDOM FROM BODILY RESTRAINT BUT ALSO THE RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO... MARRY, ESTABLISH A HOME AND BRING UP CHILDREN, TO WORSHIP GOD ACCORDING TO THE DICTATES OF HIS OWN CONSCIENCE...."
THE SECOND IMPORTANT CASE WAS PIERCE v. SOCIETY OF SISTERS. IN THIS CASE, THE COURT DECLARED THAT "[IN] THIS DAY AND UNDER OUR CIVILIZATION, THE CHILD OF MAN IS HIS PARENT'S CHILD AND NOT THE STATE'S .... IT IS NOT SERIOUSLY DEBATABLE THAT THE PARENTAL RIGHT TO GUIDE ONE'S CHILD INTELLECTUALLY AND RELIGIOUSLY IS A MOST SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE LIBERTY AND FREEDOM OF THE PARENT." THE COURT WENT ON TO HOLD THAT PARENTS ARE CHIEFLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EDUCATION AND UPBRINGING OF THEIR CHILDREN.
WHILE THE SUPREME COURT'S INTENT TO PROTECT PARENTAL RIGHTS IS UNQUESTIONABLE, LOWER COURTS HAVE NOT ALWAYS FOLLOWED THIS HIGH STANDARD TO PROTECT THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP. THE RECENT LOWER COURT ASSAULT ON THE RIGHTS OF PARENTS TO DIRECT THEIR CHILDREN'S EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE DECISIONS, AND DISCIPLINE IS UNPRECEDENTED. SINCE YOU ARE HAVING A PANEL OF ATTORNEYS TO DISCUSS SPECIFIC CASES, I WILL NOT GO INTO DETAILS AT THIS TIME. HOWEVER, I WILL REITERATE MY CONCERN THAT LOWER COURTS ARE NOT APPLYING THE PROPER LEGAL STANDARD. WITH THIS IN MIND, IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR CONGRESS TO ACT WITHIN ITS 14TH AMENDMENT, SECTION 5 POWER TO SEE THAT LIBERTY RIGHTS ARE PROPERLY PROTECTED.
RECENT PUBLIC DEBATE HAS ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE MOVEMENT TO VIOLATE PARENTAL RIGHTS. DR. JACK WESTMAN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON PROPOSES THAT THE STATE LICENSE PARENTS AS A MEANS OF CONVEYING THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY. WHILE THERE IS NO QUESTION OF THE AWESOME RESPONSIBILITY TO RAISE AND NURTURE A CHILD, THE PROPOSAL TO HAVE THE STATE LICENSE POTENTIAL PARENTS FOR THE RIGHT TO HAVE CHILDREN RAISES MANY SERIOUS QUESTIONS. WHAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE STANDARDS FOR PARENTHOOD? WHO WILL DECIDE WHAT THOSE STANDARDS SHOULD BE? WHAT IF A WOMAN WHO IS UNLICENSED BECOMES PREGNANT? THESE AND OTHER QUESTIONS STRETCH THE IMAGINATION OF FREEDOM LOVING AMERICAN PARENTS.
WITH RECENT LOWER COURT CASES AND THE TONE OF PUBLIC DEBATE AROUND "PARENTAL LICENSING", IT IS EASY TO SEE THE NEED FOR THE PARENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ACT OF 1995.
THE GOAL OF THE PRA IS SIMPLY TO REAFFIRM THE PARENTAL RIGHT TO DIRECT THE UPBRINGING OF THEIR CHILD IN FOUR MAJOR AREAS: (1) DIRECTING OR PROVIDING FOR THE EDUCATION OF THE CHILD; (2) MAKING HEALTH CARE DECISIONS FOR THE CHILD; (3) DISCIPLINING THE CHILD, INCLUDING REASONABLE CORPORAL DISCIPLINE; AND (4) DIRECTING OR PROVIDING FOR THE RELIGIOUS TEACHING OF THE CHILD.
THE PRA ACCOMPLISHES THIS GOAL BY CLARIFYING THAT THE PROPER STANDARD TO USE IN DISPUTES BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND PARENTS IS THE HIGHEST LEGAL STANDARD AVAILABLE. THIS STANDARD, KNOWN AS "THE COMPELLING INTEREST STANDARD" MEANS THAT BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT CAN INTERFERE IN THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP, IT MUST DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE IS A "COMPELLING" INTEREST TO PROTECT. NOT A GOOD OR EVEN VERY GOOD INTEREST. IT MUST BE COMPELLING. ADDITIONALLY, THE GOVERNMENT MUST SHOW THAT THE MEANS IT IS USING TO PROTECT THIS INTEREST IS THE "LEAST RESTRICTIVE" MEANS AVAILABLE. PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, THIS MEANS THAT THE LAW IN QUESTION IS NOT SO BROAD IN APPLICATION THAT IT SWEEPS IN MORE THAN IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE INTEREST IN QUESTION.
YOU MIGHT ASK, "HOW IS THE PRA GOING TO WORK?" IT USES THE TRADITIONAL FOUR-STEP PROCESS TO EVALUATE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS CASES WHICH BALANCES THE INTERESTS OF PARENTS, CHILDREN AND THE GOVERNMENT. FIRST, PARENTS ARE REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ACTIONS BEING QUESTIONED ARE WITHIN THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO DIRECT THE UPBRINGING OF THEIR CHILD.
SECOND, THEY MUST SHOW THAT THE GOVERNMENT INTERFERED WITH THIS RIGHT

***
I know many would say that such a thing violates peoples rights, but I would say that there is nothing giving them the right to place the burden on Society of their unwanted Children either...
icon url

ergo sum

04/16/03 10:15 PM

#15029 RE: Tom K #14996

For almost a thousand years, Baghdad was the cultural capital of the Arab world, the most literate population in the Middle East. Genghis Khan’s grandson burnt the city in the 13th century and, so it was said, the Tigris river ran black with the ink of books. On Monday, the black ashes of thousands of ancient documents filled the skies of Iraq. Why?

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_16-4-2003_pg4_20