You learn something new everyday
For instance, I didn’t know this was going on:
Here’s an example that I think is particular egregious: The discrimination in favor of religious parents and against irreligious ones, or in favor of more religious parents and against less religious ones, in child custody cases, on the theory that it’s in the child’s “best interests” (that’s the relevant legal test) to be raised with a religious education.
Mississippi is the most serious offender, though I’ve seen cases since 1990 in Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas; there are similar cases in 1970s Iowa, Nebraska, North Carolina, and New York. (I give cites below.) In 2001, for instance, the Mississippi Supreme Court upheld an order giving a mother custody partly because she took the child to church more often than the father did, thus providing a better “future religious example.” In 2000, it ordered a father to take the child to church each week, as a Mississippi court ordered in 2000, reasoning that “it is certainly to the best interests of [the child] to receive regular and systematic spiritual training.”
That’s just lovely.
That’s just shocking. Forgive my ignorance as a non-American, but isn’t this a rather blatant violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Yes, it is. I can’t even blame it on the South with states like Minnesota and Michigan in there.
Ordered the parent to take the child to church? WTF? There are other religions than Christianity and some people are non-religious. It’s such a violation of rights.