The opinion does not distinguish between the schools' responsibility to accommodating a test refusal and the student/parents right to refuse. While accommodating an opting-out and providing alternative activities is a matter of state law and does not exist in MD, refusing is a matter of Constitutional freedom and parental right to decide how to raise one's child as affirmed by the Supreme Court rulings in Pierce and Meyer (See Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S.390 (1923).
Perhaps if an opt-out policy contradicts State law, it's time to look at changing State law.
ReplyDeleteLeave it to the Annapolis Intellectuals to insert more loopholes in the State Law.
DeleteThe opinion does not distinguish between the schools' responsibility to accommodating a test refusal and the student/parents right to refuse. While accommodating an opting-out and providing alternative activities is a matter of state law and does not exist in MD, refusing is a matter of Constitutional freedom and parental right to decide how to raise one's child as affirmed by the Supreme Court rulings in Pierce and Meyer (See Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S.390 (1923).
ReplyDeleteThe role of the dominions
ReplyDeleteIs to draft vague opinions
Resembling peeling onions
To subjugate the minions.