Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce
Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
The House Republican Alliance, co-chaired by Nancy Elliott (R-Merrimack), William O'Brien (R-Mont Vernon) and Bob Mead (R-Mont Vernon) has been busy with constitutional amendments this session, the best known being CACR 28, which would ban marriage equality in the state.
There is another constitutional amendment on their agenda CACR 29
That the first part of the constitution be amended by inserting after article 2-a the following new article:
[Art.] 2-b. [Parental Rights.] Parents have the natural right to control the health, education, and welfare of their children; therefore the state shall not abridge the role or responsibility of parents in controlling the health, education, or welfare of their children.
I am not a lawyer, but it seems such an amendment would nullify laws against child abuse and neglect, and would also limit access to programs such as the successful children's health insurance program Healthy Kids. Notice it doesn't say parents must provide for the health, education and welfare of their children, but control it.
This group is also inconsistent in that they want the state to limit an adult woman's right to control her own body, but not take an interest in the welfare of minor children.
These legislators like to use the term "natural rights" a great deal. This concept was coined by 17th and 18th century political philosophers, such as John Locke. But for Locke ,
... natural rights were life, liberty and property, and that all people automatically earned these simply by being born.
There doesn't seem to be a "natural right" of parenting, unless children are to be considered property. Is that what they mean?