Thursday May 25, 2006


International Law Threatens Home Schooling Warns Home School Legal Defense
By Terry Vanderheyden
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.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2001/jun/01060703.html
U.S. Homeschooling Parents May be Forced to Teach Against Their Moral Principles
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/oct/03100607.html
SHARE THIS STORY:
E-mail
Print
Newsvine
Digg
Reddit
Del.icio.us
Facebook
Latest Headlines
- Pro-Abortion Expression Permitted, Pro-Life Forbidden on Campus at Australia University

- Quebec Mayor Vows to Continue Prayer Despite Human Rights Commission Order

- Ontario Forces Taxpayers to Pay for Sex-Change Operations

- California Supreme Court Asked to Stay "Gay Marriage" Order until November Public Ballot

- Anglican Acceptance of both Abortion and Sanctity of Life will Allow the Creation of a Gay Church Says Bishop

- Governor Schwarzenegger Vows to Fight Reinstatement of Traditional Marriage

- President Bush and California Bishops Oppose Judicial Activism

- Internet Expertise to Save You Time and Money

- Abortifacient Morning After Pill Now Sold off the Shelf in Canada

- UK Commons Embryo Bill Debate Heated with "Wooly Liberal Thinking"

- Letters to the Editor for May 16th, 2008

Most Read this Week
- Texas Pastor Connected with Prominent Gay Porn Website
- Texas Pastor Resigns After Involvement in Gay Porn Site Exposed
- Archbishop Publicly Tells Pro-Abortion Kansas Governor Not to Receive Communion
- Archbishop: For the Clergy Obedience to Church "Requires Preaching About the Moral Evil of Contraception"
- California Supreme Court Imposes Homosexual 'Marriage' on State
- Even the Leaders Think the Homosexual Activist Movement in Canada is Going Too Far
- Christian Ministry to Disabled Drops its Code of Conduct Under Human Rights Tribunal Pressure
- Time Magazine: "Want to wreck the environment? Have a baby." - Prince Philip Concurs
- More and More Seeing that "The Pill Kills"
- Pope Reminds Spouses of their "Responsibility To Generate New Children"
MORE NEWS:
LifeSiteNews.com Home Page
Last 10 Days
Archives
Special Reports
Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any Internet re-publishing of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews that have come from other news sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.


Back to Top