For sure I'm not going to slap you down. What I understand from the discussion here is that Constitutional issues trump the child's welfare, but that can't be right. Or am I responding as a lawyer who has handled custody cases, and that's different from the approach of academic scholars of the Constitution?
Susan Will Linden wrote: > At 03:27 PM 1/24/08 -0600, you wrote: > I know I will probably be slapped down on the ground that it is not a > legal consideration, but isn't judges deciding what will "confuse" the poor > dears, well, patronizing? I had problems with my parents' pseudo-solution > to interfaith issues, but I am sure I would have resented a court telling > me whether I was confused or not. > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; > people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) > forward the messages to others. > > > _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
