While reading about the Ninth Circus' ruling last week that told parents they can't stop a public school from giving sex surveys to 7-year-olds, I ran across this interesting passage:
This is not the first time, nor is the Ninth Circuit Court the only part of the judiciary to try to strip parents of their authority over the upbringing of their children. Other examples include:
1989 -- the San Francisco Superior Court ruled that the California Constitution's privacy guarantees for minor girls overruled any right parents had to control the behavior of their children.
1995 -- the Massachusetts Court of Appeals found that parents did not have the right to know in advance or to opt their children out of a 90-minute presentation by "Hot, Sexy and Safer Productions" that included homosexual inferences and games played with condoms.
1996 -- The Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in an Ohio case that parents could claim constitutional protection for decisions regarding the education of their children only if the decisions were based on religious beliefs.
In contrast, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 15 times, beginning in 1923 and as recently as 2000, that "the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody and control of their children" is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
In the earliest case, Meyer v. Nebraska, the high court said the state could not prohibit parents from teaching their children a foreign language.
Link.
