"Not I," said the pig...

Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, “Hear the word of the LORD: Behold, the days are coming, when all that is in your house, and that which your fathers have stored up till this day, shall be carried to Babylon; nothing shall be left, says the LORD. And some of your own sons, who are born to you, shall be taken away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.”

Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah, “The word of the LORD which you have spoken is good.” For he thought, “Why not, if there will be peace and security in my days?” (2 Kings 20:16-19)

(Tim) Recently, our eldest son, Joseph, and his excellent wife, Heidi, were rejected by an adoption agency when the home office came across an obscure sentence in the report of the home study social worker indicating Joseph and Heidi believe in corporal punishment...

Thousands of words accompanying the social worker's recommendation of Joseph and Heidi for an Ethiopian adoption were tossed aside when the woman at the top noted Joseph and Heidi would be--shall we say biblical?--in their childrearing.

What to do? Well, on the one hand Joseph and Heidi could slink away quietly, not causing a fuss and hiding their biblical faith in future home studies and adoption agency interviews. Or they could make a stink about it, writing the adoption agency's board members to inform them that their adoption agency refuses to place children in any Christian home committed to raising children biblically. But of course, who wants to cause a fuss? "Not I" said the pig.

Speaking of which, who among us ever thought about the heroes who allowed their daughters and sons to be the first black students to walk into high schools and universities across the south during the civil rights movement? Did any of those mothers and fathers enjoy the thought of the pain their precious child would suffer standing for justice?

So what kind of investment are we making in our cities, states, and nations today? Are we standing against government intrusion and the wickedness of adoption agencies, or with King Hezekiah are we content to live out our lives knowing we ourselves will escape the Babylonian captivity descending upon our children and grandchildren?

Here's excellent commentary on this theme by a homeschooling mother--and don't miss Part Two. May her tribe continue to increase. And speaking of her tribe, doesn't it warm your heart to see all the children filling the quivers of Godly men?

Comments

[Rachel Pierson]

I am so sorry to hear about this development for Joseph and Heidi. Amazing.

I just read this this article this morning:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1922840/posts

They call good evil and evil good. That what would have worked in this situation, or that Joseph and Heidi would be wonderful parents seems obvious to us, is simply because God has opened our eyes, and shed light on our path.

It just makes me want to cry. I'm so glad that God is God.

[Robert Perry]

I raised a fuss one time when the doctors were asking about guns--pointed out that BATHTUBS kill more kids accidentally than guns, but the doctor doesn't even bother to mention supervision of baths for little ones. Got blown off, sad to say.

[Kevin Hutcheson]

Tim,

It's not (just) that adoption agency that bans corporal punishment. In California, the family courts routinely order parents to refrain from corporal punishment. Language banning corporal punishment is part of the common "boilerplate" languges in custody/visitation orders generated by family courts in the county I practice in. (This occurs without any evidence of, or even allegations of abuse--it's corporal punishment the court is trying to prohibit because the courts consider ALL corporal punishment to be abusive)

In fact, I was so taken aback by the idea that a judge, or a court had the power to intrude into families and to limit parental discretion to this extent that I began working on an article addressing the disparity between the:
Expectations of parents,
State of the law in California (which does NOT equate corporal punishment with abuse), and
The current opinion of the psychological community which seems to be reflected in the opinions/conduct of our family law judiciary.

Oh and Robert, don't EVEN admit to the courts here that you are a gun owner......that's per se evidence of unfitness. (although intended tongue in cheek, that comment is sadly, also almost accurate)

[Tim Bayly]

Write the article, dear brother. Meanwhile, ADF or some Christian attorney needs to take up the case of corporal punishment as a First Amendment issue as my late friend, William Bentley Ball , took up the case of educational choice as a First Amendment issue in Wisconsin vs. Yoder--and won, praise God!

[Fred Greco]

A very worthy point, Tim. I venture to say that nearly every pastor knows of a family in some way harassed by the State over the issue of corporal punishment. It is insidious and a sign of our times.

It is also worthy of a fight!

[Kevin S. Hutcheson]

Fred,

As much as I agree with you in principle, as an attorney I would do all in my power to avoid such a fight for my client--In order to have standing to contest a court order banning corporal punishment you would have to first lose your parental rights.

In family court (where we are trying to decide if the children should live with mom or dad), if you violate an order barring corporal punishment (or if you simply admit employing corporal punishment), I would expect the judge to award custody to the other parent and to limit the parent employing corporal punishment to supervised visitation.

In dependancy court (where the state is trying to take the children away from either parent and place the child in foster care), you might have a little more leeway, but you really do risk having your children taken away.

I don't know how to establish standing to fight what I consider to be an incredible intrusion without actually destroying a family first, and/or doing substantial damage to children and their relationships with their parents.

[Kevin S. Hutcheson]

As a follow on to my last post, lest it seem that I am lecturing others, possible far more learned in the law than I, let me make it clear that my post reflects the situation as it currently exists in Northern California.

[Fred Greco]

Kevin,

I agree and did not make myself clear. I believe this is a matter for a fight from pulpits, editorials, etc. The place to fight this is not the context of a parental court ruling, but to fight to make those courts safer for Christian parents.

I agree with you, and thank you for helping me to clarify!

[Tim Bayly]

As we discuss the risk to a particular family of taking such a case to court, let's remember that Joseph and Heidi didn't need to open their mouths about spanking. Why jeopardize their chances to adopt an Ethiopian orphan? And if you stop to think about it, Christians don't really need to spank, do they? We can use other forms of discipline that don't risk child protective services showing up at our front door.

And then there's preaching about sexual sin--particularly sodomy, today. If I have a choice between being able to continue serving as a shepherd of the flock of CGS and going to prison for a hate crime, it's an easy choice. Why jeopardize a church's unity and health, let alone my own freedom, simply to beat up on homosexuals?

I'm being facetious.

Men, we're already well down the road of buying freedom with silence, and it's only going to get worse. Just ask our neighbors to the north.

[Fr. Bill]

There is an interesting difference (at least for now) between those who advocate/practice corporal punishment and those who contend that homosecuality is deviant. In the former case, it is the actual practice which the state and courts will proscribe, while in the latter, it is the the mere thought (and its expression in words) which will be construed as a hate crime.

Which (pro-corporal punishment or anti-homosexual) will provide the earliest and most wide-spread governmental action against Christians, particularly pastors? If I were a wagering man, I'd put a bundle on the laws and court decisions against those who contend homosexuality is deviant.

Corporal punishment is always apt to be a private affair, but preaching against the mainstreaming of homosexuality is always a public affair. Pr. Tim's examples of our friends in Canada can be multiplied by recent governmental actions against pastors in Scandinavia.

[Ebenezer Erskine]

Rev's. Bayly

I like what you have to say here. You may have an ally in my blog. Please come and check out my mission, I think you will be in agreement.

[AB]

This is why HSLDA (Homeschool Legal Defense Assoc.) thinks we need a parental rights amendment to the constitution. You can see more about their stance at http://www.hslda.org/parentalrights/default.asp
They feel we need to move on this now before it becomes a major issue like homosexual marriage.