A proposed constitutional amendment to protect parent's rights
By xfahctor
@xfahctor (14113)
Lancaster, New Hampshire
March 31, 2009 7:00pm CST
It is indeed a shame that we have to do things like this to safeguard what should be assumed inalienable rights, but, such are the times. A bill has been introduced to amend the constitution with text that would protect the rights of parents from both federal andsate las and international treaties. this bill seems to have a lot of support and a lot of cosponsors, but this is one you should be calling your reps AND senators to support, this is a very important bill, so please, support it.
Parents’ Rights Constitutional Amendment
[i]
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.
6 people like this
13 responses
@greatwolf75 (90)
• United States
1 Apr 09
Thanks for the info on this xfahctor. Do you know any more about this at this time? Maybe anywhere I can find more out about this?
3 people like this
@Adoniah (7512)
• United States
1 Apr 09
With the way the world and this country is going this has become a very important Amendment. Who would have thought that we as Americans would ever have had to make such an Amendment. This just shows how far we have fallen.
Thanks for posting this. I hope this one makes it.
Shalom~Adoniah
2 people like this
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
1 Apr 09
Sad it has to be done huh? the constitution itself should prevent such things but apparently the 8th grade reading level it was written at is to advanced for congress or the white house to understand, so I guess we now have to make it even clearer for them.
2 people like this
@eaforeman6 (8979)
• United States
1 Apr 09
Really appreciate the information. This is a great one and I am glad that you watch these and keep us informed. It is really good to see a bill that is actualy good for the people.This will make alot of people very happy!@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
1 Apr 09
lets just hope it gets the support it deserves, remember even if it passes both houses, being a constitutional amendment it needs to be aproved by 3/4 of each state lagislatures, so get on your state governments arses about this too.
Glad to be of service.
2 people like this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
1 Apr 09
It's sad that it has to come to this, but it's absolutely necessary with some morons in congress wanting to adopt UN resolutions that would take away a parents right to appropriately raise and discipline their own children. You can rest assured I'll be calling my legislators about this.
2 people like this
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
1 Apr 09
Recently I got into an argument with some other American atheists who felt that "child indoctrination" (i.e. -telling your kid he's a sinner and he's going to hell if he doesn't accept Jesus as if it were fact) should be considered a form of child abuse. Me being an avid constitution supporter, I opposed this, of course. It's sad, though, that there are people that think parents shouldn't have the right to bring their child up with their religious beliefs, or even home school the kids.
So, yeah, it's sad that we even have to do this, but consider the growing mentality that the state should step in and tell parents what they can and can't do with their kids, perhaps it's necessary. I'd hate for this country to end up like Canada or parts of the U.K in terms of parental rights.
2 people like this
@PrarieStyle (2486)
• United States
1 Apr 09
I sure support this. I also support the bill that's coming about not ever changing the dollar.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
1 Apr 09
At first glance, this looks like a good thing; however, it's kind of vague. I mean, does it mean there can be no laws regarding children being vaccinated against dangerously contagious diseases before attending school? Will they have to attend school (or be home-schooled) at all and will there be any kind of educational standards? Also, (and I know I'm going to take a few hits for this one...lol!), I noticed with the large list of co-sponsors there isn't a single Democrat. Do you know if there's a reason for that?
Annie
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
2 Apr 09
I'll adress your last comment first annie.
: noticed with the large list of co-sponsors there isn't a single Democrat. Do you know if there's a reason for that?"
does that at all suprise you? It's a republican bill, of course a democrat isn't going to sign on. It a.)doesn't fit the leaderships's more globalist agenda and b.) it's a republican bill. You weren't expecting any kind of cooperation in d.C. were you?
The language is specific enough to protect paernts in the united states from treaties or laws that conflict with the united states constitution or even protect it from state and federal laws that may be intrusibe in to parental rights.
As far as the vaccine concerned you raise, it is a legitimite point. However, many states already have a dissention clause and have had for a decades and we haven't had a return of anything in the way of mass out breaks yet. There are legitimate questions people have raised about the long term effects of the current vaccines on kids, there have been some studies that have shown a link to autism from some among other odd increases in certain conditions in kids in the last few decades.
I don't think this effects educational standards in any way, though it may actualy benefit them because it may well go as far as to protect the rights of parents to homeschool.
I know your a staunch democrat annie, but if you think the bill is a good thing and are only ont he fence because it is a republican bill, then call your represenatives and ask them why they haven't signed on to it yet. This isn't a partisan issue, it's an american parents issue.
1 person likes this
@spiderlizard22 (3443)
• United States
1 Apr 09
What does the amendment mean? How is this amendment going to protect parent's rights? I am not criticizing I just don't understand what is being said.
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
2 Apr 09
What it basicly does is prevent the united states from adopting any laws that intrude on the rights of parents, or singing on to any treaties that would consflict with united states law in reguards to parent's rights in how they raise their kids.
@jonesy123 (3948)
• United States
1 Apr 09
Good, especially in light of the fact that there were rumors Obama might sign some UN thing where parental rights could possibly be curtailed. Something to the extend of giving the government the authority to decide whether or not the way you raise your child is the right one (not just extending to abuse and neglect but ideology etc).
But x, I'm pessimistic today, I doubt it'll make it...
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
1 Apr 09
this amendment would actully make such a treaty blatently and specificly illegal.
Now, remember even if it passes both houses, being a constitutional amendment, it needs to also be approved by 3/4 of each state lagislatures, so get on your state governments arses about this too
3 people like this
@jonesy123 (3948)
• United States
3 Apr 09
That's interesting since I know people who do homeschool there. You just have to fulfill certain credentials.
Ignorance is a bliss..
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
1 Apr 09
You mean I can contact my reps in support of something? 
This does sound like a good bill and, I agree, it's a shame that this safeguard is needed but I'm glad that it's being done. I'll be sending out those emails.
This does sound like a good bill and, I agree, it's a shame that this safeguard is needed but I'm glad that it's being done. I'll be sending out those emails.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
1 Apr 09
Sounds really good especially the part about international law/treaty whichever because there have been many cases of parents kidnapping their children and taking them to other countries where that parent would have the right to keep that child there and the only way to get the child back to the states is to kidnap it back.
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
1 Apr 09
It w3ould also prevent any treaty being signed by us that would attempt to bring U.N. influence in to play in united states law on parental issues, as well as prevent any excessive intrusion by our own government in to our parenting.
Now, remember even if it passes both houses, being a constitutional amendment, it needs to also be approved by 3/4 of each state lagislatures, so get on your state governments arses about this too
2 people like this
@psychotaz206 (2086)
• United States
1 Apr 09
it sounds like a great one to me sence i am having a problem getting my son into a school he need to be in because of his adgd,odd,bipolar, depression, and a few other mentle problems the board of edu has been fighting me on this for a year.
@AngryKittyMSV (4317)
• United States
1 Apr 09
As a parent to two young children, I absolutely support this and will be contacting local, state and federal representatives to tell them I want them to get on board with this.
@AngryKittyMSV (4317)
• United States
1 Apr 09
I wrote to Senators Schumer and Gillibrand, (I am in NY) and also to my local assemblyman, my representative in Congress and my local Stare Senator.
