What People Think
 |
 |
78% For, 22% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H. J. Res. 42, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to parental rights (8 comments ↓ | 3 wiki edits)
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to parental rights.
()
[63 views]
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
mbgoss
April 29, 2009, 11:48am (report abuse)This is a fantastic ammendment that furthers the Constitution's primary purpose - to secure the fundamental rights of the people of the USA.
Leonard Henderson
June 28, 2009, 10:35pm (report abuse)American Family Rights Association strongly endorses this bill and encourages anybody who cares about American Freedom, Liberty, and Justice to support it.
We are not especially happy with the "highest order" verbiage, because CPS already believes their home invasions and kidnappings are "of the highest order" and justification to operate with no authority, far outside of the Constitution.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has already been De Facto-
(de facto –noun actually existing, esp. when without lawful authority)
-in force ever since the passage of the CAPTA Act of 1974, and we sincerely hope this Constitutional Amendment will fix the present tyranny and prevent the future tyranny of US adoption of the CRC.
Leonard Henderson, co-founder
American Family Rights Association
http://familyrights.us
"Until Every Child Comes Home" ©
"The Voice of America's Families" ©
Diana Jackson Sexton
June 29, 2009, 2:45pm (report abuse)There is nothing abusive about this statement! You go leonard!! I'm all for the SHUT-DOWN of CPS!!! These are mostly uneducated, illiterate & mentally deranged people who actually work for these groups of SELF-APPRAISING, worthless service providers who kidnap children and then sell them off to channel revenues to absolutely worthless contracted service providers (CRONIES of the attorneys, case workers, foster parents, retired friends and relatives... FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD!! I'm a BIG, BIG FAN of THE AMERICAN FAMILY RIGHTS ASSOCIATION!!! YEP!! I want to see SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDAS DEPENDENCY COURT of ROPA DOPA CHILD TRAFFICKERERS IN A FEDERAL PENITENITIARY!!! ALL THOSE FIP WORKERS in Saint AUgustine Florida should be prosecuted...
regjoeschmo
July 9, 2009, 7:42am (report abuse)There appears to be some concerns regarding the Parental Rights Amendment that was recently introduced by US Congressman Pete Hoekstra. Section 2 does NOT interrupt Section 1. In fact, it raises the evidentiary standard and defines "strict scrutiny." Remember that a Constitutional Right may be abridged by a compelling state interest as long as it is the "least intrusive" to serve that purpose. Section two strengthens the position of strict scrutiny.
Some have indicated Nancy Schaeffer might have an issue with this, and I will discuss this with her in the coming weeks. I already discussed it live on the air with Phyllis Schlafly, National Director of Eagle Forum and she gave an interview and supports the Amendment whole-heartedly. Also Concerned Women for America President Wendy Wright also stands behind this issue 100%. I also interviewed the Home School Legal Defense Attorney, who explains this issue a bit better as well.
regjoeschmo
July 9, 2009, 7:44am (report abuse)I think that everyone should consider these before trying to analyze what is a well-known method for challenging a law. The strict scrutiny and "least intrusive means" are very handy and would allow most CPS Civil issues to be challenged unless you voluntarily waived your rights like many do at the early onset of these type of cases. This Parental Rights Amendment draws a notable line in the sand, to insure the slippery slope doesn't continue to erode our parental rights. It must be established to limit judicial erosion.
If many would like to have a conference call on this issue, I can get some attorneys, a Congressman, or whatever to co-host and we can do it sometime in the near future. Just let me know.
Lary Holland
www.myspace.com/laryholland/
To listen to the relevant issues and hear testimony from legislators and lawyers please go to http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/39517
Starr
September 2, 2009, 9:45pm (report abuse)Its about time. These people need to stay out of our lives and quit destroying them . They need to realize they are doing more harm to these children then they are good . They have no rights in our homes or telling us how to parent . Our children arent for sale . I have seen many sates now giving ten thousand for placing a child in a adoptive parents hime . Which in turn is causing them to TPR more parents faster . This is crazy . Luckily i met the right people and learned what i needed to fight . Thanks again Leonard me eight years later and happy . And dare them to ever try me again . I know how to fight them . But cant fix what they have done the damage is irreversible.
Father_Justice
September 7, 2009, 5:11pm (report abuse)The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is an INALIENABLE right. NOT A FUNDAMENTAL ONE. Don't sell us short.
Clarence Maloney
September 19, 2009, 1:33am (report abuse)It should be "inalienable right,' not fundamental right. But I disagree with item 3 about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. You should all READ it.
What is needed is further agreement that when the 2 parents live in differet countries, whether divorced or not, they still have essentially equal parental rights which supercede claims of states.