Parental Rights.Org believes that we must close the door forever on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child by ratifying the Parental Rights Amendment. Before explaining why we believe this is the best option, please read the amendment itself:
Proposed Parental Rights Amendment
For the US Constitution
SECTION 1
The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.
SECTION 2
Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.
SECTION 3
No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.
This amendment is important because it provides explicit constitutional language to protect parental rights from government interference except in rare and extreme circumstances such as abuse and prevents international law such as the UN CRC from taking away those parental rights. The language for sections one and two are taken from two past US Supreme Court cases which ruled in favor of parental rights: Pierce v. Society of Sisters in 1925 and Wisconsin v. Yoder in 1972. Therefore the language was crafted by our own Supreme Court justices in the past and has a long history of legal understanding in the courts.
The amendment establishes parental rights as a fundamental right, the highest standard short of an absolute right which goes too far (an absolute right would protect child abusers from prosecution). It then adds section three which protects American parents from international law both in US courts and International Courts (according to Vienna Convention of Treaties, the highest standard for international law.) This section also protects against the threat of Customary International Law which I described earlier.
Next week, you will learn several more reasons that only the Parental Rights Amendment is an adequate response to the UN CRC and the worldview behind it.
Showing posts with label family. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Obama's Plans for UN CRC Ratification
The following comes from a recent national Parental Rights.Org newsletter and reminds us why we can't sit back and trust our Senate to say no to the UN CRC.
"On March 10, the Obama administration told the UN Human Rights Council that it supports the UNHRC's recommendations that the United States should "ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child [CRC]." Moreover, the administration promised that it "intend[s] to review how we could move toward its ratification.""
The current administration does not care that American parents would vastly oppose this treaty if they had even the slightest understanding of it. They will spin this into a humanitarian jesture or something absurd in order to entice a few republicans over to vote forit. Then we are in even deeper water.
So why don't American parents stand up and stop it? BECAUSE you haven't told them what they need to know about this issue! The only thing needed for the CRC to win is our silence.
"On March 10, the Obama administration told the UN Human Rights Council that it supports the UNHRC's recommendations that the United States should "ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child [CRC]." Moreover, the administration promised that it "intend[s] to review how we could move toward its ratification.""
The current administration does not care that American parents would vastly oppose this treaty if they had even the slightest understanding of it. They will spin this into a humanitarian jesture or something absurd in order to entice a few republicans over to vote forit. Then we are in even deeper water.
So why don't American parents stand up and stop it? BECAUSE you haven't told them what they need to know about this issue! The only thing needed for the CRC to win is our silence.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Part 22: Even WIthout Ratification of the CRC
Many are naïve to think that all that is now necessary is to say "no" to the treaty. I wish it were that simple. There are other ways that this worldview can harm families even without the treaty. Even without ratification of the treaty, this deceitful philosophy is already permeating our culture, lying about parents' capacity to raise children. Even without the treaty we are sliding into destruction of the family. Even without ratification, Customary International Law threatens to bring this destructive philosophy of parenting into our country one legal precedent at a time.
Hopefully, in your mind right now, you are asking what must be done to put a stop to this horrible worldview and the treaty which puts it into writing. The next section will begin to answer those questions.
Hopefully, in your mind right now, you are asking what must be done to put a stop to this horrible worldview and the treaty which puts it into writing. The next section will begin to answer those questions.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
NEA to UN: More Graphic Sex-Ed Needed
(Copied from national office newsletter)
Perhaps you thought public school sex education programs are graphic enough as it is. Not so, according to a statement by the National Education Association's (NEA) Diane Schneider to a U.N. panel last week. According to a report by C-FAM, Schneider told the audience at a panel on combating homophobia and transphobia that "[o]ral sex, masturbation and orgasms need to be taught in education," and that anyone opposing homosexuality is "stuck in a binary box that religion and family create."
In other words, schools need to rescue children from "indoctrination" by their parents and religion, and the U.N. should see that they do. Schneider also "claimed that the idea of sex education remains an oxymoron if it is abstinence-based, or if students are still able to opt out," the article states.
ParentalRights.org disagrees with the notion that schools know better than parents what is best for their children or what their children can handle. We disagree with the idea that schools should undo all the character building and value instilling that parents do at home. And we adamantly oppose the view that the United Nations should take a role in any of it. And we know you do, too.
For more information, go HERE.
Perhaps you thought public school sex education programs are graphic enough as it is. Not so, according to a statement by the National Education Association's (NEA) Diane Schneider to a U.N. panel last week. According to a report by C-FAM, Schneider told the audience at a panel on combating homophobia and transphobia that "[o]ral sex, masturbation and orgasms need to be taught in education," and that anyone opposing homosexuality is "stuck in a binary box that religion and family create."
In other words, schools need to rescue children from "indoctrination" by their parents and religion, and the U.N. should see that they do. Schneider also "claimed that the idea of sex education remains an oxymoron if it is abstinence-based, or if students are still able to opt out," the article states.
ParentalRights.org disagrees with the notion that schools know better than parents what is best for their children or what their children can handle. We disagree with the idea that schools should undo all the character building and value instilling that parents do at home. And we adamantly oppose the view that the United Nations should take a role in any of it. And we know you do, too.
For more information, go HERE.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Part 16: Foundational Articles of UN CRC
Leaving behind generalities of treaties, let’s look at the CRC itself. It has 3 foundational articles that you should be aware of. Article 3 binds the federal government to always seek the “best interest of the child”. Surely I wouldn’t argue with that. Article 18 says that governments should recognize parental responsibilities to seek the best interest of the children. It also says that governments should provide appropriate assistance to families in their parental responsibilities. So we have responsibilities and they have responsibilities to recognize those responsibilities, is that good or bad? Article 12 says that a child has a right to express his or her own views freely in all matters affecting them whether judicial or administrative. Everyone gets a say, what is so bad about that?
While these seem relatively safe MAYBE even good, a few questions must be addressed. For article 3, who decides what is “best”? – There has to be a gold standard by which to measure? Their answer is that the government and their experts decide, not you as the parents. For article 18, when does the government decide to intervene? -- when they decide the parent is not carrying out their definition of the best interest of the child. The parent is logically guilty until proven innocent. The burden of proof is on the parents rather than the government. For article 12, who decides when child and parents disagree on what is best? Government. As I said earlier, the children will simply have an unfeeling master. It is not actually the child who gains freedom to decide, but the government replaces the parents in the name of children’s freedom. Whenever the government promises benefit in the same breath as asking us to give up a right, we should stand firm against such tyranny.
While these seem relatively safe MAYBE even good, a few questions must be addressed. For article 3, who decides what is “best”? – There has to be a gold standard by which to measure? Their answer is that the government and their experts decide, not you as the parents. For article 18, when does the government decide to intervene? -- when they decide the parent is not carrying out their definition of the best interest of the child. The parent is logically guilty until proven innocent. The burden of proof is on the parents rather than the government. For article 12, who decides when child and parents disagree on what is best? Government. As I said earlier, the children will simply have an unfeeling master. It is not actually the child who gains freedom to decide, but the government replaces the parents in the name of children’s freedom. Whenever the government promises benefit in the same breath as asking us to give up a right, we should stand firm against such tyranny.
Monday, December 20, 2010
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.
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.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
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.
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.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
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.
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.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
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.
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.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
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.
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.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
"A Quiet Threat to Homeschooling"
An undated article caught the attention of a friend recently. This article, as titled above, describes an intellectual trend that may catch many parents (not only homeschoolers) off guard. The article addresses a simple idea: "Children have a constitutional right to learn about beliefs and ways of life other than those of their parents, and the state has a duty to secure that right for them." Rob Reich, a political science and education professor at Stanford University, argued exactly that at the 2001 Convention of the American Political Science Association.
If you don't read the entire article, at least consider the pieces I have included here. The following quote is directed at homeschoolers, but it takes little imagination to see how all parents would be affected by the application of this philosophy in our legal system.
"In his writings, Reich proposes that homeschooling should be monitored by the state to ensure that parents teach their children beliefs and lifestyles that they may oppose - that parents may even believe to be evil."
A reviewer of Reich's book on Amazon said it well in describing the purpose of this philosophy:
“The leading goal of education is to develop autonomy in children.”
This is the worldview which confronts our parenting, our children, and the future of our families' coming generations. Will you please begin to pray and then take up your battle armor?
If you don't read the entire article, at least consider the pieces I have included here. The following quote is directed at homeschoolers, but it takes little imagination to see how all parents would be affected by the application of this philosophy in our legal system.
"In his writings, Reich proposes that homeschooling should be monitored by the state to ensure that parents teach their children beliefs and lifestyles that they may oppose - that parents may even believe to be evil."
A reviewer of Reich's book on Amazon said it well in describing the purpose of this philosophy:
“The leading goal of education is to develop autonomy in children.”
This is the worldview which confronts our parenting, our children, and the future of our families' coming generations. Will you please begin to pray and then take up your battle armor?
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
"The Child" Documentary
Watchman Cinema has produced an amazing documentary detailing the current struggle for parenting freedoms. Months of hard work have paid off in their 85 minute video which includes interviews from a wide variety of legal experts, parenting experts, physicians, and most importantly the stories of families scarred by the overzealous interventions of government.
If you love your children, this video should scare the living daylights out of you! By providing a 360 degree view of this crucial issue, Watchman Cinema has held nothing back and left you no excuse for inaction. We are facing the attempted eradication of parental freedom by leaders in various sectors of our society all in the name of protecting children. Parents will soon become the babysitters for the government's children IF we continue our complacency.
For more information on the video and how you can use the video to share this message, go to Watchman Cinema. This documentary should knock you to your knees in prayer.
If you love your children, this video should scare the living daylights out of you! By providing a 360 degree view of this crucial issue, Watchman Cinema has held nothing back and left you no excuse for inaction. We are facing the attempted eradication of parental freedom by leaders in various sectors of our society all in the name of protecting children. Parents will soon become the babysitters for the government's children IF we continue our complacency.
For more information on the video and how you can use the video to share this message, go to Watchman Cinema. This documentary should knock you to your knees in prayer.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Part 8: The Role of the State in Raising Children
The Bible only permits the state to have the role of punishing wrong doers in Romans 13. The state does have a duty to protect children from criminal actions, but it does not have the jurisdiction to dictate how children are raised in a non-criminal family environment. This idea of jurisdiction is similar to the theology of Abraham Kuyper, a great Dutch theologian and politician from around 1900. He separated the spheres of authority between the family and the state, as well as other spheres of authority based on his study of the Bible. While he saw God as ruling over all of life, different spheres had their own jurisdictions and hierarchies of earthly authorities. Church, family, the state, labor, and other areas of life were mostly interdependent but separate spheres. The family sphere, thanks to our lackadaisical attitude, has allowed intrusion inch by inch over many decades. The state should not intrude into another sphere no more than the church should run the state nor the family run the church. This is even more true in our own contemporary culture as the state becomes more secular.
Raising children is a religious enterprise which if entrusted to a secular government will fail to produce religion except worship of the state. Not only will the secular state not teach any form of religion, it will teach against religion. There is not neutrality in regards to what is taught in school. Either all things are taught as relating to God as creator and father. Or they are taught to either replace God or to ignore God. An education neutral to all religion is thus atheistic by definition and practical implication. Furthermore, one of the mantras of our culture is tolerance. Feigned neutrality and tolerance go hand in hand. Teaching all religion is seen as good, all except one, Christianity. Christianity is viewed as intolerant and therefore its true form cannot be taught as children must be free to choose for themselves. Since, in their view, there is no private sphere of the family, all is public and open to their regulation. They are compelled not by neutrality, but by anti-Christian intent.
In summary, from a Biblical and Christian perspective, it should be abundantly clear that parents are Biblically commanded to raise and educate children, not the secular civil government or state. With this Biblical foundation in the forefront, I want to further clarify our parental freedoms from a legal standpoint.
Raising children is a religious enterprise which if entrusted to a secular government will fail to produce religion except worship of the state. Not only will the secular state not teach any form of religion, it will teach against religion. There is not neutrality in regards to what is taught in school. Either all things are taught as relating to God as creator and father. Or they are taught to either replace God or to ignore God. An education neutral to all religion is thus atheistic by definition and practical implication. Furthermore, one of the mantras of our culture is tolerance. Feigned neutrality and tolerance go hand in hand. Teaching all religion is seen as good, all except one, Christianity. Christianity is viewed as intolerant and therefore its true form cannot be taught as children must be free to choose for themselves. Since, in their view, there is no private sphere of the family, all is public and open to their regulation. They are compelled not by neutrality, but by anti-Christian intent.
In summary, from a Biblical and Christian perspective, it should be abundantly clear that parents are Biblically commanded to raise and educate children, not the secular civil government or state. With this Biblical foundation in the forefront, I want to further clarify our parental freedoms from a legal standpoint.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Part 6: Biblical Basis For Parenting, Section Two
If that is not clear enough, read Deuteronomy 6:6-7 “And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.” Obviously, being from the Old Testament, it was directed at the Israelites. Can we then just ignore it today? Jesus said that He did not come to abolish the law, but to uphold it in Matthew 5:17-20. I believe that the principle of this command is still binding on parents based on Ephesians 6 and numerous other verses in the Bible. Therefore, parents today are still bound to teach the next generation born into their family. These scripture references clearly indicate that God’s commands include religious instruction as we see in these verses. By the description given, this is more than just sending them to Sunday School or vacation Bible School, but the responsibility of parents in the midst of daily life. Sunday School and VBS are not inherently wrong, just inadequate for obedience if parents ignore actively participating in the religious education of their children.
In order to provide more New Testament scripture, read I Timothy 3:2,4,and 5 “Therefore an overseer must be above reproach … He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?” Unless we are willing to read this as saying that only deacons and elders must know how to manage their own household, we are bound to strive for obedience to this command. Digging deeper into the original working is once again helpful. “Managing his own household” comes from prostEnai, or to “preside over”. The definition of “preside” is “to exercise guidance, direction, or control” (Merriam Webster Free Dictionary). There are other verses I could mention to further solidify the claim that parents are commanded to nurture, train, teach, and to preside over their children. I hope that these are enough to convince you of your Biblical duty.
In order to provide more New Testament scripture, read I Timothy 3:2,4,and 5 “Therefore an overseer must be above reproach … He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?” Unless we are willing to read this as saying that only deacons and elders must know how to manage their own household, we are bound to strive for obedience to this command. Digging deeper into the original working is once again helpful. “Managing his own household” comes from prostEnai, or to “preside over”. The definition of “preside” is “to exercise guidance, direction, or control” (Merriam Webster Free Dictionary). There are other verses I could mention to further solidify the claim that parents are commanded to nurture, train, teach, and to preside over their children. I hope that these are enough to convince you of your Biblical duty.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Message from my newsletter....
COPIED from my newsletter, (no time to edit)
Good morning,
I just sent out a newsletter in the last few days, but I am writing this because today is election day. I could endorse specific candidates, but instead I want to focus only on principles in this newsletter. Candidates will come and go, but principles, which guide our lives and which should guide our votes, should remain steadfast and based on truth. Therefore, this election is no different than any other election. Each opportunity that God affords us to cast our vote, is an opportunity to influence not only our future, but the future of generations to come. Each election is an opportunity, or maybe better yet, a DUTY to vote on the principles which guide our lives all other days of the year. Here is my advice for you today:
First, consider your principles and the basis for them. For my family, the basis is the Word of God. Therefore, one of the principles that will guide my vote is how the result of the election will affect my freedom to follow Ephesians 6:4. Will the elected official protect my freedom to raise my children by Biblical truth or will the official restrict it?
Second, study the candidates by not only what they say, but what they have done. Their character is just as important as what they say, if not more so. Without a trustworthy character, their words ring a hollow tone of false hopes, if not outright deception. Ask yourself if you will continue to have freedom of directing your children's upbringing under their authority. Your vote has consequences.
Finally, only after you consider this, should you leave your home in order to vote. Don't misunderstand me. I am not saying that this is the only rule by which to measure a candidate. I am just stating my firm conviction that in the long run, this standard is one of the most important criteria to consider.
Good morning,
I just sent out a newsletter in the last few days, but I am writing this because today is election day. I could endorse specific candidates, but instead I want to focus only on principles in this newsletter. Candidates will come and go, but principles, which guide our lives and which should guide our votes, should remain steadfast and based on truth. Therefore, this election is no different than any other election. Each opportunity that God affords us to cast our vote, is an opportunity to influence not only our future, but the future of generations to come. Each election is an opportunity, or maybe better yet, a DUTY to vote on the principles which guide our lives all other days of the year. Here is my advice for you today:
First, consider your principles and the basis for them. For my family, the basis is the Word of God. Therefore, one of the principles that will guide my vote is how the result of the election will affect my freedom to follow Ephesians 6:4. Will the elected official protect my freedom to raise my children by Biblical truth or will the official restrict it?
Second, study the candidates by not only what they say, but what they have done. Their character is just as important as what they say, if not more so. Without a trustworthy character, their words ring a hollow tone of false hopes, if not outright deception. Ask yourself if you will continue to have freedom of directing your children's upbringing under their authority. Your vote has consequences.
Finally, only after you consider this, should you leave your home in order to vote. Don't misunderstand me. I am not saying that this is the only rule by which to measure a candidate. I am just stating my firm conviction that in the long run, this standard is one of the most important criteria to consider.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Part 5 Biblical Basis for Parenting Part 1
Any argument needs a sturdy foundation, something we can all agree on wholeheartedly. Before I can convince you to gather into an army, I must convince you that it is your responsibility. Hopefully, the majority of you can be convinced (if you are not already) with sound Biblical exegesis and without too much debate. While there are many scripture texts that illustrate the principle that parents are responsible for their children’s upbringing, I will focus on three that are the most direct in the commands. These three are Ephesians 6:4, Deuteronomy 6:6-9, and I Timothy 3:5.
Ephesians 6:4 reads “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (ESV). While fathers are named directly, both parents will likely be held accountable for their contribution to children’s upbringing. In this verse, parents are told to “bring them up” or ektrephete auta in Greek, in the “discipline” paideia of the Lord and the “instruction”, or nouthesia of the Lord. The Greek word ektrephete auta translated as “bring them up” means to be nurturing. What does it mean to nurture? I believe it is safe to say that feeding, clothing, protecting are included in the concept of nurturing among many other such tasks. Then the Greek word paideia is translated as “training”. Earlier in 2 Timothy, teaching in mentioned, so this word for discipline probably is intended to say more than just teaching. It appears to indicate a more active, involved, and interactive training process for children by their parents. Finally, the Greek word nouthesia, translated as instruction, is a word with more of an admonishment connotation than just the concept of teaching. With this connotation, we are commanded to warn our children of morally wrong behavior, sinful choices, and other potentially self damaging behavior. Nurturing, training, and admonishment are therefore central tasks assigned to parents by God, even commanded.
Even the bare conscience of man knows that parents have a duty to carry out these tasks as well as protect their children. We instinctively abhor the parent who neglects their child to the point of that child being harmed. However, this function of conscience is not sufficient as it can be seared and shrugged off, or justified as simple cultural differences in child rearing. Therefore, the Bible speaks loudly and clearly in these verses. It really leaves no doubt on the matter. Considering God’s clarity and boldness, neither our sloth, nor our ignorance, nor any early power’s stand against our duty is a sufficient excuse for us to not obey this command. I will return to this though of earthly powers standing in our way a little later.
Ephesians 6:4 reads “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (ESV). While fathers are named directly, both parents will likely be held accountable for their contribution to children’s upbringing. In this verse, parents are told to “bring them up” or ektrephete auta in Greek, in the “discipline” paideia of the Lord and the “instruction”, or nouthesia of the Lord. The Greek word ektrephete auta translated as “bring them up” means to be nurturing. What does it mean to nurture? I believe it is safe to say that feeding, clothing, protecting are included in the concept of nurturing among many other such tasks. Then the Greek word paideia is translated as “training”. Earlier in 2 Timothy, teaching in mentioned, so this word for discipline probably is intended to say more than just teaching. It appears to indicate a more active, involved, and interactive training process for children by their parents. Finally, the Greek word nouthesia, translated as instruction, is a word with more of an admonishment connotation than just the concept of teaching. With this connotation, we are commanded to warn our children of morally wrong behavior, sinful choices, and other potentially self damaging behavior. Nurturing, training, and admonishment are therefore central tasks assigned to parents by God, even commanded.
Even the bare conscience of man knows that parents have a duty to carry out these tasks as well as protect their children. We instinctively abhor the parent who neglects their child to the point of that child being harmed. However, this function of conscience is not sufficient as it can be seared and shrugged off, or justified as simple cultural differences in child rearing. Therefore, the Bible speaks loudly and clearly in these verses. It really leaves no doubt on the matter. Considering God’s clarity and boldness, neither our sloth, nor our ignorance, nor any early power’s stand against our duty is a sufficient excuse for us to not obey this command. I will return to this though of earthly powers standing in our way a little later.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Part 4 of Many: Nothing New Under the Sun
A little research will quickly reveal how this trend has been growing for decades, even centuries. However, after years of incrementally slow changes, political forces are now moving faster and attempting to solidify a legal foundation for their philosophy of parenting. This is done in the name of “we’re from the government and we are here to help”. They claim to be championing the cause of abused and oppressed children across the globe. Many are even brazen enough to champion protection from parents by claiming exaggerated statistics about child abuse.
In order to combat this intrusion and thus defend our children, you must understand each of the following aspects of this issue. First, you must understand the Biblical basis of your parental calling and duty. This is not simply a “be a parent because it benefits you” situation. You have a command from God to bear direct responsibility for your children throughout their formative years. Next, you must understand your constitutional rights and the legal history of our country’s family law. This provides confidence in your legal standing and weapons for the battle at hand. From there, a necessary ingredient is a clear vision of the worldview behind this push to remove parental influence. You must know your adversary, their motives, their methods, their logic, their fears, and their weaknesses. Along with this understanding, you must read and know the details of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. This treaty, in all its proclaimed good will, is the tangible manifestation of the worldview above. It is one of their most dangerous weapons. With all this information in your head, you must then press a little further into the issue to understand the political situation which makes this worldview potentially implementable. Finally, with such wisdom of the adversary, you must do more than respond with a reflexive cry of frustration or anger. Parental Rights.Org has formulated a response that requires mass participation by parents through both a concerted voice of opposition and individual behaviors that will synergize to stop this attack on our children in its tracks. You must understand the logic of the response and your necessary involvement. Then you must fulfill your calling as a parent with these weapons of knowledge and wisdom in an epic battle for the hearts, souls, and minds of your children
In order to combat this intrusion and thus defend our children, you must understand each of the following aspects of this issue. First, you must understand the Biblical basis of your parental calling and duty. This is not simply a “be a parent because it benefits you” situation. You have a command from God to bear direct responsibility for your children throughout their formative years. Next, you must understand your constitutional rights and the legal history of our country’s family law. This provides confidence in your legal standing and weapons for the battle at hand. From there, a necessary ingredient is a clear vision of the worldview behind this push to remove parental influence. You must know your adversary, their motives, their methods, their logic, their fears, and their weaknesses. Along with this understanding, you must read and know the details of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. This treaty, in all its proclaimed good will, is the tangible manifestation of the worldview above. It is one of their most dangerous weapons. With all this information in your head, you must then press a little further into the issue to understand the political situation which makes this worldview potentially implementable. Finally, with such wisdom of the adversary, you must do more than respond with a reflexive cry of frustration or anger. Parental Rights.Org has formulated a response that requires mass participation by parents through both a concerted voice of opposition and individual behaviors that will synergize to stop this attack on our children in its tracks. You must understand the logic of the response and your necessary involvement. Then you must fulfill your calling as a parent with these weapons of knowledge and wisdom in an epic battle for the hearts, souls, and minds of your children
Monday, October 11, 2010
Part 3 of Many: Introduction to the issues facing American Parents
The simple, cold, hard truth is that the traditional view of parenting is under frontal assault. What is this traditional view in danger of passing away with the hula hoop? The American tradition of parenting has long viewed parents as free, within the bounds of the law, to raise their own children according to their values and beliefs. Only clearly proven criminal behavior, proven by due process, terminated a parent’s right to direct their children’s education and upbringing. This traditional view clearly finds its roots in the Bible and is evident across even other cultures and throughout history.
Contrasting this view, which most of you probably hold, is the view held by many in positions of governmental power or by so called child experts. As the quiz in Part 2 of this series and even an hour of research into this issue proves, these leaders and experts believe that they have a right and a duty to intrude into your family’s parenting practices. Many want to dictate increasingly intrusive regulations for how parents raise their children and what parents teach their children. In the realm of education, the National Education Association and the US Dept. of Education currently decide what children must learn in public schools. Through their overpowering financial influence on textbook publishers, they also indirectly guide the curriculum of many private schools. These decisions involve not only subjects like math or reading, but morals like tolerance and sexual values. Together with doctors, bureaucrats, and vaccine producers, schools press parents into vaccine administration through campaigns of fear. (Disclaimer: some vaccines are good, some I question. Do the research yourself. I am not advocating for or against any vaccine and will not answer any specific questions on vaccines). Child Protective Services and Department of Health and Human Services want to tell you how you discipline your children or at least fear their actions. Certain leaders proclaim that a village is needed to raise your child. Against this notion, consider the idea of children being raised by a “tribe”? A tribe would simply be a group of individuals which the parents choose to relate with their children, rather than a bureaucrat or group only related by proximity instead of shared values? Finally, the United Nations refuses to be left out of this big government intrusion. They want to force our federal government to teach the values of tolerance of immoral behaviors through their Convention on the Rights of the Child and their UNESCO Sex Education guide.
Contrasting this view, which most of you probably hold, is the view held by many in positions of governmental power or by so called child experts. As the quiz in Part 2 of this series and even an hour of research into this issue proves, these leaders and experts believe that they have a right and a duty to intrude into your family’s parenting practices. Many want to dictate increasingly intrusive regulations for how parents raise their children and what parents teach their children. In the realm of education, the National Education Association and the US Dept. of Education currently decide what children must learn in public schools. Through their overpowering financial influence on textbook publishers, they also indirectly guide the curriculum of many private schools. These decisions involve not only subjects like math or reading, but morals like tolerance and sexual values. Together with doctors, bureaucrats, and vaccine producers, schools press parents into vaccine administration through campaigns of fear. (Disclaimer: some vaccines are good, some I question. Do the research yourself. I am not advocating for or against any vaccine and will not answer any specific questions on vaccines). Child Protective Services and Department of Health and Human Services want to tell you how you discipline your children or at least fear their actions. Certain leaders proclaim that a village is needed to raise your child. Against this notion, consider the idea of children being raised by a “tribe”? A tribe would simply be a group of individuals which the parents choose to relate with their children, rather than a bureaucrat or group only related by proximity instead of shared values? Finally, the United Nations refuses to be left out of this big government intrusion. They want to force our federal government to teach the values of tolerance of immoral behaviors through their Convention on the Rights of the Child and their UNESCO Sex Education guide.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Part 2 of Many, A Little Parental Rights Quiz
PART 2
We often need a significant jolt of fear, a rather sour taste of anxiety to recognize danger which has stealthily approached us in our blind spots. Parents across America are now sporadically receiving such jolts and developing such anxiety as they are personally faced with governmental attempts to intrude into family decisions. Our national office has pieced together a little quiz for those needing their own jolt of reality.
1. True or False: A mother in Minnesota was told that she could not access the medical records of any of her children 11 years old or older, or discuss her child's health with the physician, without obtaining her child's permission.
2. True or False: A mother in Illinois was twice refused her request to opt her daughter out of sexual education lectures that she found objectionable.
3. True or False: A mother was refused her 13-year-old daughter's grades when she enrolled her in an algebra class.
4. True or False: In most states, you will be denied access to library information about your children, including the titles of books which are accumulating late fees.
For the answers to this quiz and even more questions that will rattle your false sense of security, go HERE.
(Return soon for part 3....)
We often need a significant jolt of fear, a rather sour taste of anxiety to recognize danger which has stealthily approached us in our blind spots. Parents across America are now sporadically receiving such jolts and developing such anxiety as they are personally faced with governmental attempts to intrude into family decisions. Our national office has pieced together a little quiz for those needing their own jolt of reality.
1. True or False: A mother in Minnesota was told that she could not access the medical records of any of her children 11 years old or older, or discuss her child's health with the physician, without obtaining her child's permission.
2. True or False: A mother in Illinois was twice refused her request to opt her daughter out of sexual education lectures that she found objectionable.
3. True or False: A mother was refused her 13-year-old daughter's grades when she enrolled her in an algebra class.
4. True or False: In most states, you will be denied access to library information about your children, including the titles of books which are accumulating late fees.
For the answers to this quiz and even more questions that will rattle your false sense of security, go HERE.
(Return soon for part 3....)
Monday, October 4, 2010
Part 1 of Many, Transcript of Recent Lecture on Parental Rights
On August 7th I delivered an hour’s worth of education on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to a group of homeschoolers here in Tennessee. I want to share that talk with you in bite sized portions over the coming weeks in order to deepen your understanding of this crucial issue, to challenge you to join our effort, and to equip you in many ways for this battle. Below is part 1 of that talk.
For those of you unfamiliar with me or my involvement in this issue, permit me to introduce myself and to provide some credibility for what follows. I am a physician in Tennessee who trained in both adult and pediatric medicine. After practicing both areas of medicine for 5 years, I moved into adult medicine alone for the sake of being a father to 2 wonderful children whom we are homeschooling. It is through homeschooling connections that I learned of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in February of 2009. A fateful e-mail alert, which I will never forget, led me down a trail of research that even today continues to startle me. In this process, I have strategically researched the issue from multiple angles and debated others from the variety of perspectives weighing in on this issue. As a final ingredient, I have begun studying the Biblical responsibility of parents to direct the care and upbringing of their children.
I offer the accumulation of the past year and a half of study to you with the sincere hope that you will arouse as parents from your slumber with a clear call to gather into an army for the sake of your children and mine.
For those of you unfamiliar with me or my involvement in this issue, permit me to introduce myself and to provide some credibility for what follows. I am a physician in Tennessee who trained in both adult and pediatric medicine. After practicing both areas of medicine for 5 years, I moved into adult medicine alone for the sake of being a father to 2 wonderful children whom we are homeschooling. It is through homeschooling connections that I learned of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in February of 2009. A fateful e-mail alert, which I will never forget, led me down a trail of research that even today continues to startle me. In this process, I have strategically researched the issue from multiple angles and debated others from the variety of perspectives weighing in on this issue. As a final ingredient, I have begun studying the Biblical responsibility of parents to direct the care and upbringing of their children.
I offer the accumulation of the past year and a half of study to you with the sincere hope that you will arouse as parents from your slumber with a clear call to gather into an army for the sake of your children and mine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)