One interesting thing she said was that the state has a COMPELLING INTEREST to ensure that the children entrusted to it for educational purposes are reading proficient by third grade.
I was glad she used the phrase "COMPELLING INTEREST," something that I've not heard many legislators use. But I would EXPAND the state's "COMPELLING INTEREST" and insist that the state has a "COMPELLING INTEREST" in a child's overall development, not just in his or her ability to read.
As a result, I believe that due to the devastation inflicted on children whose parents divorce and the impact divorce has on a child's educational achievement, THE STATE HAS A COMPELLING INTEREST TO REDUCE DIVORCE. Why? Because divorce is disastrous for children and is detrimental for their education and reading ability.
This third of four videos is part of my attempt to show that THE STATE HAS A COMPELLING INTEREST TO REDUCE DIVORCE. One of the first things they can do is RESCIND UNILATERAL NO-FAULT (FORCED) DIVORCE LAWS.
Unilateral no-fault divorce laws found their origin with Vladimir Lenin in Bolshevik Russia in 1917. They were established to help abolish the family. Within a decade such social upheaval had taken place that even communists were debating the applicability of these laws, and eventually they had to be changed.
For all intents and purposes, the divorce laws in the state of Texas mirror the laws that Vladimir Lenin imposed on Bolshevik Russia. The communists were smart enough to modify such laws. In Texas, we are not there yet.
Thank you to Representative Julie Johnson for opening up a discussion on this important topic and for extending an invitation with me to discuss these matters with her in greater detail.
For the article discussing the effects of divorce on children's education, please go to
0 Comments