alt.education

"Tom Snyder" wrote:
>The state should get out of the social education business.

We the people have decided otherwise, in all 50 states.

>It's a parent's repsonsibility to teach his/her children, not the state.

We the people have decided otherwise, in all 50 states, not to trust
that parents will do so.

>Someone's viewpoint is going to rule,

"We the people's" pluralistic views rule.

>either the homosexual hedonist's or the Christian follower's.

False dichotomy.

>God defines what the family is in the Bible,

God does no such thing, and the Bible is utterly irrelevant to
American law, and should remain that way.

>not the hedonist's whim or lust.

Neither has any relevance to the legal definition of a family.

>If the Supreme Court says that 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it
>true? No!

But it might make it the law of the land. Of course the Supreme Court
has no reason to rule on the matter.

>So why should we follow its ignorant rulings on Church and State?

Because its rulings are the law of the land, and it is better to be
law-abiding (render unto Caesar ...)

Your evidence for "ignorance" is lacking. Or rather, you provide
evidence of your own ignorance, not that of any court (most of whose
members are probably better Christians than you are).

lojbab