So, in theory, Yoder upholds home schooling on grounds of religious freedom – but only for those that can claim "religious conviction" demonstrably approaching that of the established and relatively consistent doctrine and practice of the Amish. Again, there isn't a single Evangelical Christian denomination that can claim anything approaching this. Evangelicals, especially, are all over the map, even within each congregation...

It is unfortunate, but there isn't a single Christian group these days that can claim the consistency of "religious conviction" that the Amish can. Not one. As disparate as the Amish may be, no other Christian denomination in America can claim the solidarity of doctrine and practice they do, and certainly, "the teachings of Christianity" before the Law or society is generally a meaningless claim in matters of either doctrine or practice.

I'm reminded of the words of Jesus, warning parents of their flight from evil in the Last Days: "Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!" (Matt. 24:19 & Luke 21:23). There is only one solution to the State's antagonism against parents. A *Constitutional Amendment* guaranteeing the *Rights of Parents*. And there is an organization which has been sponsoring such an amendment: ParentalRights.org (http://parentalrights.org/). To concerned parents, I say, visit their site, watch their video, "OVERRULED: Government Invasion of your Parental Rights," sign their petition, and encourage your legislators to protect your God-given rights and responsibilities to see to the education of your own children.

...and if it has full power to modify and abolish the right of a parent to custody, it has full power in lesser decisions, like those of "eduction" -- so says a little book of mine, "The Religion of the Child," published in 1929 by one of these concerned German Lutherans (Dr. P.E. Kretzmann), as he examined, and lamented even at that time, "The Present Status of Parents' Rights" (section four). The simple fact is, the recent toleration of "Home Education" by the State is just that, *recent*. There is absolutely NO history of legal precedent in America protecting the rights of parents above the interests perceived by the State. Christian parents are in for the mightiest of Holy Wars if the likes of Barack Obama continue to maintain power.

Nevertheless, some time before 1929, the "Supreme Court of Nebraska sustained the decision of a lower court declaring that the prohibition of the use of German in grades below the ninth [was] not an unlawful interference with religious liberty." That is, *even upon the claim of religious liberty*, the State's perceived obligation to the community has long been upheld at the highest levels of legal precedent, and has given it the authority to intervene in the decisions of parents to make decisions regarding the education and upbringing of their own children. "The legislature has full power to alter and modify, if not abolish, the parent's legal right to the custody of a child..."

But it has long been the case that parents have no absolute rights as such, and are regarded as having no say in the education of their child should the State decide to intervene. The "interests of the community" have always been considered bu the State as *the* controlling interests. For example, in the early part of last century, German Lutherans -- especially those that emigrated to the United States the previous century because of religious persecution in Germany -- taught the German language, exclusively, in their Lutheran dayschools. The German language hainv a much richer vocabulary and far more precise grammar than English. These Lutherans insisted that their German language was necessary to maintaining the purity of their religion.

Interesting. The State of Wisconsin does not have "compulsory education." It's considered a violation of civil rights. If the State claims the authority to compel what people learn, then they also hold authority over the *content* of the individual's conscience itself. Instead, the State of Wisconsin has "compulsory attendance." Home Educators in WI cling to this difference for their lives -- WI legislators are reminded of it every time the topic of intruding into the privacy of the home, by threatening invasive regulation of Home Educators, comes up.

Its opening paragraph reads: "The historical record provides compelling evidence that racism underlies gun control laws -- and not in any subtle way. Throughout much of American history, gun control was openly stated as a method for keeping blacks and Hispanics "in their place," and to quiet the racial fears of whites. This paper ...[suggests] that gun control laws should be regarded as "suspect ideas," analogous to the "suspect classifications" theory of discrimination already part of the American legal system. " Read it. Gun control is a method of suppressing undesirables that the "upper class" has historically embraced.

Utterly insane that they would vote for their enemy.

When we were dealing with these maniacal anti-Second Amendment Democrats back in the 1990's, the racist nature of gun control was addressed head-on. An RKBA activist named Clayton Cramer authored an article entitled, "The Racist Roots of Gun Control". No one would publish it. He shopped it around for several years. It was finally published in the Winter 1995 issue of "Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy". It is available, here: http://www.claytoncramer.com/scholarly/racistroots.htm

“There’s a direct correlation between gun control and black people control” This is absolutely correct. In fact, it's not just Blacks, it can be reduced to any undesirable class of people. Certainly, it is established, Democrats consider Blacks to be an undesirable class of people, given their death grip on abortion rights and the demonstrably disproportionate impact abortion has on the Black community. If one takes this impact seriously, there is only one word that describes the impact of abortion: Genocide.