Last but not least of Ross Douthat’s questions for Indiana’s critics is:
In the light of contemporary debates about religious parenting and gay or transgender teenagers, should Wisconsin v. Yoder be revisited? What about Pierce v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary?
Those cases affirmed the right of parents to educate their children, invalidating state laws mandating compulsory public education. The Supreme Court twice ruled the state did not have a compelling interest to overrule the natural rights of parents to raise their children.
But the natural rights of parents are poised to evolve dramatically. Just as the foundation for marriage definition disfunction was laid in the sexual libertinism of the ’60s and ’70s, a scientific revolution in how children are created is laying the groundwork for a Brave New World-style, state-centric apparatus to manage the rearing of children by licensed (i.e., politically correct) foster units of one, two, three, whatever.
The Indiana offensive has solidly grown the cult of unassailable individuality from the public sphere to the private sphere. Compulsion is the new acceptance is the new tolerance. The transition to the new regime is all but over when corporate America preemptively gets behind the cause to protect their brands.
Here’s what it means: The state will allow you to have property if you don’t use the property as an extension of your conscience, or unapproved discernment. A cog in the planned economy, as opposed to vocation and calling, is our economic destiny. The fascist, demand-side ethos (exemplified by Joaquin Castro) has mutated into a concept of property that exists at the will of customers taking their private sins public. “Running your business” now literally means letting others run your business. You take on all the risk, in turn they take all the benefit.
Now if it’s illegal to run a business outside the aegis of the LGBT mafia, how will holdouts to the new order be allowed to pass on their ideas of living for the Spirit instead of for the flesh to the next generation? It would be as if a stratum of society was raising its children to be bank robbers. Are not those parents a de facto insurgency, enemies of the rainbow state?
Well, let’s not overstate the case, “reasonable” voices would say. At the very least they are abusing their children with bad teaching, holding back their development into New American Citizens.
We’ve seen how aggressive the state is in kidnapping children from their parents “for their protection.” Surely “abusive” teachings can become grounds for every child to be forcibly adopted by the state, so their (re)education can continue unimpaired.
That’s one plausible answer.
Related: “Secession is the best outcome now.”