(from Marty Lederman) re: spiritual treatment exceptions

[David M. Wagner]

-----Original Message-----
From:   James G. Dwyer [SMTP:JDwyer at UWYO.EDU]
Sent:   Thursday, December 03, 1998 4:08 PM
To:     RELIGIONLAW at listserv.ucla.edu
Subject:        Re: (from Marty Lederman) re: spiritual treatment exceptions

        -----Original Message-----
        From:   richard duncan [SMTP:rduncan at UNLINFO.UNL.EDU]


        [and there
        is clearly a legitimate governmental interest in respecting the
right
        of parents to provide a religious upbringing for their children]



        This presumes, rather than demonstrating, that parents have such a
right and that it is of such a scope that the state owes a duty to parents
to let them deny their children certain things the state believes to be in
the children's interests.



  [David M. Wagner]
Natural law:  children are born to parents.
Positive customary law:  almost all societies have, one way or another,
both respected parental rights and enforced parental duties.
Pre-liberal theory:  Aquinas, citing parental rights inter alia, denied to
Christians the right to baptize Jewish children against their parents'
wishes.
Liberal theory:  Locke embraced a limited but real "paternal power."
Positive constitutional law:  Pierce, Yoder
Psych/Soc findings:  e.g. the "Dan Quayle Was Right" school of thought,
finding social-science evidence that children flourish best in the
two-parent family

Did I leave anything out?

David M. Wagner
Regent University School of Law