<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Parental Rights Amendment Needs Amendment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thebiblealone.com/2010/02/parental-rights-amendment-needs-amendment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thebiblealone.com/2010/02/parental-rights-amendment-needs-amendment/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 02:27:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Potter MD</title>
		<link>http://www.thebiblealone.com/2010/02/parental-rights-amendment-needs-amendment/comment-page-1/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Potter MD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.thebiblealone.com/?p=115#comment-26</guid>
		<description>Good Morning,  
I ran across your article by accident (also known as God&#039;s providence) while reading about RPCUS.  It caught my attention because I am working to support the amendment which you are arguing against.  I have read your concerns and considered their plausibility.  I understand why you argue against Section 2.  My only answer is that Section 2 provides the understood definition of a &quot;fundamental right&quot; found in Section 1.  We, as no one would, argue for an absolute right of parents.  This would prevent prosecution of child abuse by parents.  A fundamental right seems to be the highest right in constitutional law that is appropriate for this issue.  
   I also have a question.  Given the erosion of parental rights already occurring and the potential for their legal disappearance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, what do you propose as an alternative.  Would you support an amendment with sections 1 and 2?  Do you have other ideas?
   I hope to hear from you.  If I am wrong about the amendment, I hope you will convince me.  If you are misunderstanding Section 2, I hope I can persuade you to support the amendment.
Sincerely,
Eric Potter MD
Tennessee Director for Parental Rights.Org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good Morning,<br />
I ran across your article by accident (also known as God&#8217;s providence) while reading about RPCUS.  It caught my attention because I am working to support the amendment which you are arguing against.  I have read your concerns and considered their plausibility.  I understand why you argue against Section 2.  My only answer is that Section 2 provides the understood definition of a &#8220;fundamental right&#8221; found in Section 1.  We, as no one would, argue for an absolute right of parents.  This would prevent prosecution of child abuse by parents.  A fundamental right seems to be the highest right in constitutional law that is appropriate for this issue.<br />
   I also have a question.  Given the erosion of parental rights already occurring and the potential for their legal disappearance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, what do you propose as an alternative.  Would you support an amendment with sections 1 and 2?  Do you have other ideas?<br />
   I hope to hear from you.  If I am wrong about the amendment, I hope you will convince me.  If you are misunderstanding Section 2, I hope I can persuade you to support the amendment.<br />
Sincerely,<br />
Eric Potter MD<br />
Tennessee Director for Parental Rights.Org</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced

Served from: www.thebiblealone.com @ 2012-02-07 15:09:57 -->
