Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: New Hampshire Judge rules against home-schooling because of religious views  (Read 15140 times)

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

Untruths in the sense that the court decision was not about 'faith', it was about having the father's joint custody maintained.
Logged

ONLYWAY

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293

Well I would have to disagree.  This is obviously not a direct frontal attack, they wouldnt be so bold yet.  This is a sideways attack on Christianity and the family.   They love to put freedom in a lose lose situation and especially love undermining faith.  Even if they chose to let the girl be home schooled everyone has conceded that the final word is up to the courts they will continue to expand this new found power as they always do.  If they let the father win then they have proven again the court has more input then parents and children AND that Christian education is barinwashing and dangerous...they need to be exposed to sodomites and perverts to be balanced people.  

 !.)  fact is that the mother and the girl want to keep the homeschool ed. and not attend govt schools.  She is not being harmed in any way physically or emotionally or socially and I am sure her education is much better.  The father wants her in govt school - that is 2 - 1 so now the court can come in and say my vote counts more then 1.  Why do they even get a vote?

2.)  What if the ex-husband was a sodomite living with his boyfriend and the mother said I don't want my daughter exposed to that perversion.  I am sure in this twisted world they would say if she is not being physically harmed then you have no right and probably find some way to punish her for being a bigot.

Like I said...they make good into bad and bad into good.  TWISTED PEOPLE.


Regarding your defense of BD Ross's satements about posttrib777 " -These untruths again?  "Thou shalt not lie."    So you are claiming that he was informed about the story but obviously didnt understand it or agree with her premise so he called her a liar?  Like I said she  should call him ignorant or infomed...but you calim he wasnt uninformed so that just leaves the other option...maybe you should break it to him...


Untruths in the sense that the court decision was not about 'faith', it was about having the father's joint custody maintained.

« Last Edit: January 28, 2011, 10:31:40 am by ONLYWAY »
Logged
New Hampshire Charter:  "Considering with ourselves the holy will of God and our own necesity, that we should not live without wholesome laws and civil government amonng us, of which we are altogether destitute, do, in the name of Christ and in the sight of God, combine ourselves together to erect and set up among us such governments as shall be, to our best descerning, agreeable to the will of God..."

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

Its joint custody. The court can not simply ignore the father's legal rights.
And its not two to one... its one to one. The daughter is in the legal custody of her two parents... not emancipated.

I wasn't supporting the statement... simply trying to explain what was meant.
Logged

creaganlios

  • Guest

ONLYWAY, it would appear that your sensitivity to 'attacks' on Christianity have led you into some knee-jerk reactions here.

First, we have discussed thsi situation ad nauseum - it is NOT a home education case, and it is NOT a freedom of religion case....it is an acrimonious DIVORCE case that involvess Joint Custody and disagreement between the parents.  It was decided on grounds peculiar to the family in the context of Joint Custody.

Tully
(A Christian, who home educated 5 of his 6 children, and who entirely disagrees with you)
Logged

ONLYWAY

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293

Well first of all I don't believe in joint custody...who ever breaks the marriage contract should also lose such rights.  Secondly, that isnt true. In many cases the child's wishes are indeed included in the discussions...I know this from the child's side.

The point is simply WHY IS EVERYONE OK WITH THE COURT MAKING THESE KINDS OF DECISIONS???  That is the issue!  Most Christians have allowed the govt and the courts to determine morality in this country.  As long as things where the way they wanted it all was good but as society gets more and more depraved they/we have dug our own pit and the govt and a depreaved society is gong to bury us in it.  

For example, homosexual marriages.  Christians have accepted that we need to get permission from the govt to get married.  We must get a marriae license and register our marriage with them and agree by default to their marriage contract.  All was fine with them as long as the govt defined marriage the way we wanted but as society gets more and more depraved they are changing the definition of marriage into something that it isnt and we have to by default go along with it.  Why does govt get to determine such things!  There shouldn't be govt involvement in any personal relationships!  If 2 dudes want to sign a contract and live together then have at it but dont expect me to say it is a "marriage" or that it is not a disgusting sin and slap in God's face.

All "marriages" should be entered into with personal contracts between the partners.  Govt should stay out of it.  

Its joint custody. The court can not simply ignore the father's legal rights.
And its not two to one... its one to one. The daughter is in the legal custody of her two parents... not emancipated.

I wasn't supporting the statement... simply trying to explain what was meant.

« Last Edit: January 28, 2011, 04:41:25 pm by ONLYWAY »
Logged
New Hampshire Charter:  "Considering with ourselves the holy will of God and our own necesity, that we should not live without wholesome laws and civil government amonng us, of which we are altogether destitute, do, in the name of Christ and in the sight of God, combine ourselves together to erect and set up among us such governments as shall be, to our best descerning, agreeable to the will of God..."

creaganlios

  • Guest

The point is simply WHY IS EVERYONE OK WITH THE COURT MAKING THESE KINDS OF DECISIONS???  

and

All "marriages" should be entered into with personal contracts between the partners.  Govt should stay out of it. 
Your second statement necessitates the condition you raise in your first comment. One of the primary functions of the court system is to adjudicate breaches of contract. 

For example, homosexual marriages.  Christians have accepted . . . but as society gets more and more depraved they are changing the definition of marriage...

Careful with generalizations.  My same-gender marriage was initiated by, performed in, blessed by, and celebrated in my Christian Church. 
Logged

ONLYWAY

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293

Yes the courts are suppose to adjuticate breaches in contracts but all this case should involve is who broke their marriage contract and then that person loses their rights...simple.  The court should not be involved in anythign more then that.

Again, if you and you man friend want to call yourself married then go right ahead but don't expect me to think it is OK...because it is not.  I don't care if your "church"or every person in the world thinks it OK.  The Bible makes God's opinion of your relationship very clear.  I am not trying to restrict you in any way - do what you want and stop trying to get everyone to approve of you...we don't.  But it isnt us that is making you feel guilty...that's God.

The point is simply WHY IS EVERYONE OK WITH THE COURT MAKING THESE KINDS OF DECISIONS???  

and

All "marriages" should be entered into with personal contracts between the partners.  Govt should stay out of it. 
Your second statement necessitates the condition you raise in your first comment. One of the primary functions of the court system is to adjudicate breaches of contract. 

For example, homosexual marriages.  Christians have accepted . . . but as society gets more and more depraved they are changing the definition of marriage...

Careful with generalizations.  My same-gender marriage was initiated by, performed in, blessed by, and celebrated in my Christian Church. 
Logged
New Hampshire Charter:  "Considering with ourselves the holy will of God and our own necesity, that we should not live without wholesome laws and civil government amonng us, of which we are altogether destitute, do, in the name of Christ and in the sight of God, combine ourselves together to erect and set up among us such governments as shall be, to our best descerning, agreeable to the will of God..."

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

The Bible also makes it clear that only God can judge his commandments.

As for custody, its not a matter of whether a marriage contract even existed.
And we don't have any knowledge of whether the contract was broken or disposed agreeably.



Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

Also a question: When two people are married and have a child... do you then believe they share custody?
Logged

creaganlios

  • Guest

I don't care if your "church"or every person in the world thinks it OK. 

What is the purpose of putting the word "church" in quotation marks?

Are you suggesting that the Episcopal Church in the USA is not a legitimate church? 
Logged

ONLYWAY

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293

up is down and down is up.  black is white and white is black.  You can make up any definition you want for any word you want but don't expect me agree with your made up definitions.  I will stick with the definitions God wrote in His Word.  Why are you so concened with what other people think you???  If yoiur conscience bothers you so much then realize that it is not us making you feel guilty...It's God.



I don't care if your "church"or every person in the world thinks it OK. 

What is the purpose of putting the word "church" in quotation marks?

Are you suggesting that the Episcopal Church in the USA is not a legitimate church? 
Logged
New Hampshire Charter:  "Considering with ourselves the holy will of God and our own necesity, that we should not live without wholesome laws and civil government amonng us, of which we are altogether destitute, do, in the name of Christ and in the sight of God, combine ourselves together to erect and set up among us such governments as shall be, to our best descerning, agreeable to the will of God..."

ONLYWAY

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293

I woiuldn't use the word custody...I would say responsibility.  The govt should have no say in family life.  

Did you hear the quote by the judge...he ruled he didnt like the "rigid" christianity of the girl and her mother so forced her into govt schools so he can learn how to be a pervert adn worship the state and themselves.  I thought this want about religion?!?!!?    http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/27/too-religious-to-home-school/

Also a question: When two people are married and have a child... do you then believe they share custody?
« Last Edit: January 29, 2011, 08:25:15 pm by ONLYWAY »
Logged
New Hampshire Charter:  "Considering with ourselves the holy will of God and our own necesity, that we should not live without wholesome laws and civil government amonng us, of which we are altogether destitute, do, in the name of Christ and in the sight of God, combine ourselves together to erect and set up among us such governments as shall be, to our best descerning, agreeable to the will of God..."

creaganlios

  • Guest

Why are you so concened with what other people think [sic] you??? 

I'm not concerned with what you think of me. I was more interested in having you admit to your own incredibly narrow bigotry. Which you don't have the honesty to do.

But I'll give you another chance to redeem (or condemn) yourself:

What is the purpose of putting the word "church" in quotation marks?  Are you suggesting that the Episcopal Church in the USA is not a legitimate church? 
Logged

ONLYWAY

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293

First of all this thread is about a mom and daughter being bullied forced to be indoctirnated with govt propaganda but somehow you manage to twist the conversation about your sex life.  Again, get over no one cares and stop trying to get everyone to approve you your lifestyle. 

Regarding teh definition of a church I am not gonig to have any more doctrinal discussions with you.  You don't believe teh Bible is literally god's words so there is no point.  you believe what you want.  If you want to learn what God's definition of a local church is read Acts.  Lots of groups call theeir gatherings a "church" "church" of satan, mormons, catholics etc etc  they are very different religions so they obviously can't all be new test churches.  I knwo nothing abotu yru church but if they dont believe the Bible then I dont want to.

Why are you so concened with what other people think [sic] you??? 

I'm not concerned with what you think of me. I was more interested in having you admit to your own incredibly narrow bigotry. Which you don't have the honesty to do.

But I'll give you another chance to redeem (or condemn) yourself:

What is the purpose of putting the word "church" in quotation marks?  Are you suggesting that the Episcopal Church in the USA is not a legitimate church? 
Logged
New Hampshire Charter:  "Considering with ourselves the holy will of God and our own necesity, that we should not live without wholesome laws and civil government amonng us, of which we are altogether destitute, do, in the name of Christ and in the sight of God, combine ourselves together to erect and set up among us such governments as shall be, to our best descerning, agreeable to the will of God..."

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

The article is one-sided. It refuses to acknowledge the father's legal rights.

So the father shares responsibility, but has no say in the upbringing of the children?
If your child told you were going to 'Hell', because you didn't 'obey' her mother... what would your reaction be?

And should the government protect your wife's rights? Or should you be able to whip or stone her for her disobedience?




« Last Edit: January 30, 2011, 03:36:54 am by John Edward Mercier »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up