State control
Doug Masson has the lead on a story out of Marion County, Indiana (that’s Indianapolis), on a divorce that left the parties scratching their heads: The trial judge inserted a provision prohibiting the parties from exposing their kids to “non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals,” apparently concerned over the parents practice of Wicca.
Doug says there must be something else to the story, and I agree:
The father says that the court inserted the religious restrictions on its own, and not at the request of either parent. Hopefully there is more to this story that makes the judge’s order something other than wildly and obviously unconstitutional.
In theory, the divorce courts are there like any other civil court: to provide a place for citizens to resolve their disputes. It should be that, just because the parents utilized the judicial system to dissolve their marriage, they do not subject themselves to years of state scrutiny and control of their lives, i.e. They should remain free citizens with full constitutional rights. However, there is a trend in government, both the legislature and the courts, to impose “fixes” on people who enter the judicial system.
So in this case, the judge said, “So you’re here for a divorce. Okay, let me tell you how to raise your children.” If there is a dispute between the parents on the issue, then the judge would have a role in deciding the issue. But if there is no dispute, what is the judge doing?
