HSLDA proposes Homeschooling amendment to Constitution

This isn't the main topic of the article, but I felt these paragraphs worth noting.

From WorldNetDaily...

Michael Farris, cofounder of the Home School Legal Defense Association, has called for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to protect the right of parents to educate their children at home, in light of what is developing in Europe, and the growing influence of international court conclusions in the U.S. 

His concern is that if the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child were ratified by the Senate or adopted by the federal courts as enforceable international law, American homeschooling could be banned. 

He notes that the parents' rights to control their children's education never were written into the U.S. Constitution because the Founding Fathers recognized that it was the Bible that gave parents a God-given right to educate their children at home or in a private or government school.

Here's a dirty little secret you won't here the Main Stream Media ever mention: Amending the US Constitution is no longer allowed. Oh, yeah, technically it's still part of the Constitution, but realistically, Liberals have all but torn it from the document. Any time any Constitutional Amendment has been proposed in the past few decades, the MSM (the self-appointed propaganda arm of the DNC and Liberals) flood the air with the hackneyed phrase "it will most certainly open the door to..." then ramble on about whatever idiotic thing they think the general public would oppose the most. 

Of course in the 70s and 80s the Liberals were all for the so-called Equal Rights Amendment, and came close to getting it ratified until Reagan put a stop to it. But Reagan didn't claim it would "open the door to..." anything, he simple said they had a better way of getting the same goal accomplished. He, of course, was speaking of the public goal of leveling the playing field in employment and education for men and women, not the real goal of Feminists and Liberals of imposing a gender neutral society that would ultimately force the acceptance of homosexual marriages, homosexual adoption and the gamut of the Liberals plateful of immoral legislation. Obviously they gave up on the Amendment strategy, and changed their tactics to activist judges imposing their agenda on the country.

Would one Amendment open the door to a pantheon of wacky Amendments? Well, it never has in the past. The US Constitution in its 219 year lifespan has been amended (not counting the first ten, the Bill of Rights) exactly 17 times. Going through them some seem to be a bit trivial (Amendment 22 limits the terms of the President to 2. A stab at FDR by Republicans) but none really off the wall. So why would we assume society would suddenly go "Amendment happy" were another to be added? Obviously they won't, but since Liberals have found a convenient route around the Constitution via activist judges, and Conservatives prefer legitimate means of implementing laws, the continuing lie that one Amendment will cause the collapse of civilization serves Liberals. 

The truth is with the damage to the Constitution done by activist judges, we are in desperate need of a number of Amendments in order to codify the balance of powers as well as the real intent of the Constitution. Most people know this, but whenever there's any real attempt at beginning the process the MSM marketing strategy kicks into high gear and the scare tactics begin.

I wish Mike Farris well, but unless there's some kind of Herculean marketing campaign launch to accompany such an effort, it will be futile.

Posted by Danny Carlton at December 21, 2006 7:38 AM