Part 13: The Emerging Worldview that Threatens Our Children, Section 3

Does this view of the world agree with your own beliefs about parenting? Have you fallen for their deception that you are incompetent and should just trust them all the time? The second aspect of this warped worldview is that many groups and leaders also have a different view of legal rights than the majority of America holds. This view synergizes with this philosophy towards government knowing best.

Americans have long viewed rights as boundaries that government was assigned to protect so that freedoms could be practiced by individual citizens. Within those boundaries, citizens are free to practice or to not practice those rights. For example, gun rights or freedom of speech. You can carry a gun if you don’t break the law, but you are not required to do so. What gun rights would we have without the Bill of Rights? On the contrary, International theory of rights understands rights as something that the government is obligated to provide as a service or to meet a physical need or to equalize two groups. Citizens can demand that right and expect the government to provide it. That may be health care, education, social programs. It often includes taking from one and giving to another.

When these two philosophies or worldviews are combined and applied to children’s rights, the following results: Government knows what is best and is legally bound to provide that to the child regardless of parent’s wishes. Children can demand that the government provide this right over the protest of parents. Parents must carry out the government’s plan for what is best for the child, not their own belief in what is best. Under these circumstances, children are not really emancipated from their parents, but instead they are enslaved to a faceless, unemotional government bureaucracy rather being protected by loving parents.

Part 12: The Emerging Worlview that Threatens Our Children, Section 2

Many so-called experts in pediatrics, education, social services, and other child related professions hold to this philosophy. One major example is the American Academy of Pediatrics. Working as a pediatrician for several years, I believed this deception until I realized what was really happening. Parents are slowly, but surely convinced that they need help from experts. Parents are trained to feel incompetent. To some degree even the pediatricians don’t recognize what they are doing.

Another powerful example is the US Department of Education. It also covertly spreads the lie that “teachers know better than parents”. Now we are facing the growth of national standards in education which will do little for math or science or reading. Instead, we will have a federally mandated curriculum for anti-bullying and tolerance which degrades Christianity.

In the introductory quiz (last blog post), I asked what is parens patriae. This is the legal term that says parents lose the right to direct their children’s education once the child enters school grounds. Parents essentially abdicate any say in the process under this legal attack on parental rights. Several stories from affected families will further elucidate this legal principle. A family moves to a Mississippi small town and enrolls their child in public school. The mother is told that the child is not allowed to walk 2 blocks to school. One day, the mother walks to school to pick up her child and is told that she must go home and return with her car if she wants her child. In a similarly egregious example, a child was sent from school by taxi to get an abortion without parental knowledge. In other schools, a debate is raging over what age schools can begin offering condoms to children.

Part 11: The Emerging Worldview that Threatens our Future Generations, Section 1

There are three different aspects of this worldview which synergize to threaten our children. First, much of the international community and many inside our own country promote the philosophy that the government is the one who will make the best choices for children, NOT PARENTS. Second, they believe that government and its authorities know what is “best for the child” even more so than parents. Therefore, they should intervene to guarantee this “best”. Finally, this fits with the idea of a Nanny Sate that always knows best and attempts to construct an externally controlled utopia. It is externally controlled in that it uses laws and punishment versus internal control of will and desire in a morally directed society.

Who believes in this philosophy? Surprisingly, many state leaders, US congressmen, and state department leaders hold to this philosophy. Some have even spoke this aloud in our halls of government One of Tennessee’s own state Senators stated publicly that he did not for the life of him see what was wrong with the UN CRC, which is the most explicit expression of this philosophy in the world (HANG ON, I will soon explain the details). Several in the Tennessee House and Tennessee Senate voted AGAINST a state resolution opposing the UN CRC last year although it eventually passed both houses. Some have even written books about a village raising a child.

Having children myself, I agree that parents need a community around them. However, the parents should choose who influences the child, not a government or its agencies. I liked what someone else said in that it takes a tribe, not a village. Parents choose the tribe, or community that surrounds their children, not the government.

Part 10: Quiz Intermission

At this point in my August 7th speech, I stopped for questions and dialogue.

Questions to you, the reader:

Who is responsible for a child’s education according to the Bible?

What are the goals of education for Christian families?

Can a secular state teach morality or religion fairly?

Does neutrality exist?


If you aren’t sure, go back and read the prior posts…..

And now, a little quiz to introduce the next section…

Who knows what is best for children?

It takes a _________ to raise a child.

What is parens patriae?

A right is a) opposite of your left, b) freedom within boundaries, c) guaranteed services from the government.

Part 9: The Legality of Parental Freedoms

First of all, parental rights in our country stand on clear tradition from even before the founding of our nation. These are Judeo-Christian Biblical values and traditions brought to America by our forefathers from Europe. Parental rights in our country also stand on many precedents and legal facts.

First, the Tenth Amendment protects parental rights by setting limits on federal government from intruding on rights reserved to the people and to the states. Therefore the federal government only has powers delegated to it and power over non-criminal family activity has not been so delegated by the Constitution.

From this basis, Supreme Court precedents have followed this reasoning. Multiple cases beginning in 1925 have upheld parent’s rights to raise and educate their own children. You can study them on the Parental Rights.Org website. This has been unquestionably upheld until 2000 Troxel v. Granville. Only a plurality, not a majority opinion, upheld parental rights as being constitutionally protected in that case. The plurality opinion means that 4 or less justices voted that parental rights are constitutionally protected. They rule in favor of the parents in the actual case, but the lower courts are left to decide for themselves about the extent of parental rights since not all justices agreed.

More on this important arena of the parental rights battle will come later.

So, besides a Biblical duty, we also have a constitutional and historical foundation for parental rights which reiterate the Biblical understanding that parenting belongs to parents.