Cooper, seated at the table to the judge\u2019s right, stood first. \u201cCooper Stone of Jameson and Stone appearing for the parents, Your Honor.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI assume that the fine looking couples seated with you are the \u2026\u201d the judge began. He fumbled through some papers for a moment and then continued, \u201care the Thomases and the Garvises.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s right, Judge,\u201d Cooper replied. \u201cThe Thomases are closest to me, and the Garvises are to their right.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
After the introductions Randolph assumes it\u2019s time to get right into things, but Judge Holman shuts him down.<\/p>\n
\u201cMr. Suskins [i.e. Randolph], why don\u2019t you take your seat for a moment?\u201d the judge interrupted. \u201cI have some preliminary matters to cover that may change the order of things that you had in mind for this hearing in my<\/em> courtroom.\u201d His tone was pleasant, but Holman stared at Suskins with raised eyebrows and an ever-so-slight-smile that gave a clear message who was in charge.<\/p><\/blockquote>\nJudge Holman is ever so ready to put Randolph in his place, because Judge Holman does not like<\/em> Randolph. Why Because Randolph does not live in Loudoun County.<\/p>\nThe first issue, as I\u2019ve mentioned\u2014clearly I got ahead of myself\u2014is the media. Judge Holman asks whether Cooper and Randolph think the trial will bring to light anything that might \u201cembarrass\u201d the children or otherwise harm them.<\/p>\n
\u201cNo, Your Honor,\u201d Cooper said, turning to look at Layton and Emily.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Is it as odd that they\u2019re here as it feels like to me? I\u2019ve been in juvenile proceedings in child protection cases before; the kids have never been present. Is this a regional thing?<\/p>\n
\u201cWe know of nothing embarrassing at all that has been alleged. In fact, we don\u2019t even know any wrongdoing or harm that has been alleged, much less that will be proven. The only allegations that exist in this case are that these families have taught their children traditional Christian doctrine, that they have disciplined their children in a manner that has been not only legally accepted for all of our nation\u2019s history, but has been deemed good parenting ever since the Book of Proverbs was written, and that the Thomas family has chosen to teach their son in the same manner as chosen by the first governor of this Commonwealth, Patrick Henry. The only embarrassing thing is that our national government thinks there is something wrong with this kind of parenting.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
All he had to do was say \u201cNo, Your Honor.\u201d\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\nJudge Holman, though, thinks Cooper\u2019s little speech was awesome\u2014and says as much.<\/p>\n
\u201cWell, Mr. Stone, you have managed to argue your case pretty thoroughly on an introductory manner. I see that your uncle\u2019s proclivities have been passed down to you. Tell him that you did a little better today than he has done in the past few years.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Is that a dig at his uncle?<\/p>\n
What makes all this really<\/em> weird, though, is that when Randolph tries to follow suit, Judge Holman shuts him down.<\/p>\n\u201cLet me say first, your Honor, that we strongly disagree with Mr. Stone\u2019s characterizations of this case as failing to allege any wrongdoing. We believe that the treaty in question has caused our nation to become committed to what is best for children and any deviation from that standard in fact causes\u2014\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cMr. Suskins,\u201d Holman interrupted. \u201cYou don\u2019t need to argue the merits just because our young Mr. Stone has done so. You and I have been around the block a couple times, it would appear, and so I will just assume that you are a very competent lawyer and that you can give a good substantive answer for little speeches like the one Mr. Stone just gave\u2014although I will say as a speech it wasn\u2019t that bad.\u201d<\/p>\n
The deputy buried his mouth in his hand to keep from laughing aloud as he watched from his bailiff\u2019s perch.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Really?<\/p>\n
Ultimately, Judge Holman gives Randolph the space to state that he thinks other parents would benefit from learning about their new responsibilities under the treaty, and that media access to the trial would help spread this information.<\/p>\n
I just realized that I forgot to quote Farris\u2019 description of Randolph when he stood to introduce himself to the court. Let me give you that here:<\/p>\n
\u201cGood morning, Your Honor,\u201d the lawyer brushed back some disobedient strands of his brilliant silver hair, which was a bit on the long side. His deep blue suit hung perfectly on his trim physique in a manner that strongly suggested a custom tailor. \u201cIf it pleases the court, I am Randolph Suskins of Baxter, Connolly and Suskins, appearing for the petitioners, Children\u2019s Defense Fund and the National Education Association.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Farris\u2019 penchant for this kind of writing is at least partly explained in his description of the buzz as the media entered the court, finally granted entrance by Judge Holman:<\/p>\n
The print journalist got quickly busy scribbling phrases like \u201cbrown hardwood benches grooved with the marks of more than a century of justice-seekers,\u201d \u201carched colonial windows rising for two full stories,\u201d and other descriptions of the courtroom to give their articles that extra verbal edge.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
To be sure, certain writing forms do include such flowery language. I\u2019m fairly certain, however, that courtroom reporting is not usually one of them. At least\u2014not on this level, anyway. This isn\u2019t the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s worth noting that the children\u2019s guardian ad litem, a Rachel Hennessey, objected to allowing the media on the grounds that details of the children\u2019s spanking might be embarrassing to the children if their friends or classmates were to hear them repeated in the news. Judge Holman chose to allow the media access anyway, merely barred them from interviewing the children or reporting any especially sensitive details.<\/p>\n
Rachel, by the way, is introduced as a \u201cyoung redhead\u201d who is five feet three inches tall. Her suit is not described. It is presumably not as splendid as Randolph\u2019s.<\/p>\n
Before the hearing can turn to more substantive issues, Judge Holman once again scolds Randolph.<\/p>\n
\u201cMr. Suskins, let me speak with you for a second.\u201d<\/p>\n
A bit bewildered, Suskins rose, flicking back the longish strands of silver hair that continually bedeviled his forehead. \u201cYes, Your Honor,\u201d he replied, as if he had fully anticipated this exchange.<\/p>\n
\u201cMr. Suskins,\u201d Holman said, holding up a three-inch stack of legal papers, \u201cwhen did you file this document that is euphemistically called a brief?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI believe we filed them on the day indicated by the local rules, Your Honor. That would have been earlier this week.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cMr. Suskins, the local rules of this juvenile court indicate a deadline for filing,\u201d Holman said, rocking back while lacing his fingers together and placing his hands behind his head. \u201cThere is no rule that prohibits you form filing these papers at the last possible minute. However, there is a bit of difference between your submission and the typical brief we get in this court in a juvenile case. \u2026<\/p>\n
\u201cNow, Mr. Stone has responded in record time with his brief. I am not about to try to digest three inches of text from you and an inch and a half from Mr. Stone in the time that your late filing necessitates. I am simply not prepared to take testimony, nor am I prepared to make any ruling today because I need more time to digest these briefs. And if you ever, and I mean ever, make another last minute filing of this magnitude in this case or any other, I will hold you in contempt of court!\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Judge Suskins says that he is changing the rules henceforth so that briefs of more than seven pages must be submitted ten days before the regular filing deadline. With a few more choice words, he finishes.<\/p>\n
In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I\u2019m already exhausted! The procedural issue that Judge Holman wants answered is, how do the Children\u2019s Defense Fund and the National Education Association have standing to bring this lawsuit to begin with?<\/p>\n
Last week, several individuals asked exactly who is paying Randolph, the wealthy-ass lawyer, to argue this case. The answer is the Children\u2019s Defense Fund and the National Education Association. At the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child meeting we saw earlier in this book, it was decide that these two agencies, and not the relevant government agency, the National Commission on Children, should bring the lawsuit. This was to give the Commission some distance from the case, and thus from criticism of the case. We never got to see Nora or Jody go to either the CDF or the NEA, however, so we don\u2019t know how they convinced these organizations to hop on board with this case.<\/p>\n
Randolph points Judge Holman to \u201ctab A in the appendix to our brief,\u201d which contains a provision from \u201cArticle 45, on page 21 of the appendix\u201d of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs you can see from this section, NGOs\u2014that is non-governmental organizations that have been officially sanctioned by the United Nations\u2014are given the authority to assist the UN in the implementation fo this treaty.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Farris does not offer the text of Article 45 for the reader. That may not be all that surprising, considering that this is what that text actually states (it is section a that is of interest):<\/p>\n
Article 45<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\nIn order to foster the effective implementation of the Convention and to encourage international co-operation in the field covered by the Convention:<\/p>\n
(a) The specialized agencies, the United Nations Children\u2019s Fund, and other United Nations organs shall be entitled to be represented at the consideration of the implementation of such provisions of the present Convention as fall within the scope of their mandate<\/strong>. The Committee may invite the specialized agencies, the United Nations Children\u2019s Fund and other competent bodies as it may consider appropriate to provide expert advice on the implementation of the Convention in areas falling within the scope of their respective mandates<\/strong>. The Committee may invite the specialized agencies, the United Nations Children\u2019s Fund, and other United Nations organs to submit reports on the implementation of the Convention in areas falling within the scope of their activities<\/strong>;<\/p>\n(b) The Committee shall transmit, as it may consider appropriate, to the specialized agencies, the United Nations Children\u2019s Fund and other competent bodies, any reports from States Parties that contain a request, or indicate a need, for technical advice or assistance, along with the Committee\u2019s observations and suggestions, if any, on these requests or indications;<\/p>\n
(c) The Committee may recommend to the General Assembly to request the Secretary-General to undertake on its behalf studies on specific issues relating to the rights of the child;<\/p>\n
(d) The Committee may make suggestions and general recommendations based on information received pursuant to articles 44 and 45 of the present Convention. Such suggestions and general recommendations shall be transmitted to any State Party concerned and reported to the General Assembly, together with comments, if any, from States Parties.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
In sum, article 45 states that relevant NGOs should (a) have a representative present at the consideration of the implementation of provisions of the Convention that fall within their scope; (b) offer expert advice on the implementation of the Convention in areas within their scope; and (c) submit reports on the implementation of the Convention on areas that fall within their scope.<\/p>\n
Nothing here sounds like it gives NGOs the authority to bring lawsuits. It sounds like it\u2019s targeted, say, at NGOs providing medical care to children, or supporting children\u2019s ability to stay in school, or educating new mothers on breastfeeding and infant care. In effect, article 45 simply states that interested parties that play a role in fulfilling the rights and responsibilities of the Convention should be involved in official efforts to meet those responsibilities.<\/p>\n
And yet, Holman doesn\u2019t blink. He fully accepts this. He asks for documentation that the CDF and the NEA are \u201cUN-sanctioned NGOs\u201d and is provided this information. He is satisfied\u2014sort of.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t mind telling you, Mr. Suskins,\u201d he said, \u201cthat your whole theory troubles me. I am not saying that I am going to find against you on this or any point, but it troubles me deeply that the treaty seems to give this kind of authority to private organizations.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It \u2026 doesn\u2019t. It doesn\u2019t seem to do that at all.<\/p>\n
Judge Holman next asks Randolph to explain \u201cvery briefly how these families have violated their children\u2019s rights under this UN treaty.\u201d Randolph explains, arguing that spanking \u201cis unquestionably banned by Article 19 of the Convention\u201d and that \u201cTaking a child out of official government-mandated education programs can be done but not only the child\u2019s rights and wishes have been appropriately reviewed\u201d\u2014by the Commission, state social services departments, public schools, or an NGO\u2014\u201cto see if such decisions are in the best interests of the child.\u201d<\/p>\n
Let\u2019s pause for a moment and look at Article 19.<\/p>\n
Article 19<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation,<\/strong> including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.<\/p>\n2. Such protective measures should, as appropriate, include effective procedures for the establishment of social programmes to provide necessary support for the child and for those who have the care of the child, as well as for other forms of prevention and for identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment and follow-up of instances of child maltreatment described heretofore, and, as appropriate, for judicial involvement.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Unless Farris agrees that spanking is \u201cphysical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation,\u201d he ought to be out there arguing that the Convention does not<\/em> ban spanking. But he does not do that. And there would seem to be some precedent for this argument\u2014all but one country has ratified the Convention, but less than a third of these countries have banned spanking.<\/p>\nAlso, the article says that states party to the treaty will \u201ctake all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures\u201d to protect children from these various forms of violence\u2014it seems to suggest that the U.S. would need to actually ban spanking, and gives no opening for legal cases (there is nothing about \u201cjudicial measures\u201d) absent actions of the legislature or administrative actions (which might possibly include an executive order).<\/p>\n
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Randolph does not cite a specific article of the treaty when addressing the fourth allegation\u2014Randolph argues that teaching children that Christianity is the only true religion violates the treaty by teaching hatred of other religions and denying them \u201ctheir right to develop the kind of tolerance that is essential if we are going to live in peace throughout the world.\u201d Judge Holman is highly troubled by the idea that his courtroom would hear a case on what is taught in Sunday school, and he says as much\u2014while assuring Randolph that he will honor the law, of course.<\/p>\n
Judge Holman announces that the hearing will reconvene in 30 days, and that in the meantime each side may \u201ctake up to four depositions of not more than a half-day each\u201d\u2014meaning, they can call witnesses and ask questions of them, while they are sworn in\u2014and that he will read through each side\u2019s brief in the meantime.<\/p>\n
And that\u2019s the end of the hearing. So much of this is repetitive\u2014even Randolph\u2019s discussion of how the families have violated the treaty\u2014that I think it would have been extremely easy to cut this book down to half it\u2019s length.<\/p>\n
At least our chapter next week won\u2019t cover a hearing!<\/p>\n
I have a <\/b>Patreon<\/b><\/a>! Please support my writing!<\/b><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I’m already exhausted! The procedural issue that Judge Holman wants answered is, how do the Children’s Defense Fund and the National Education Association have standing to bring this lawsuit to begin with?<\/p>\n
Click through to read more!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":845,"featured_media":37702,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[719],"class_list":["post-37678","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-forbid-them-not"],"yoast_head":"\n
Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I'm already exhausted!\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I'm already exhausted!\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Love, Joy, Feminism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-07-13T09:00:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-10T12:40:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/166\/2018\/07\/judge-1587300_1920.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"576\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Libby Anne\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Libby Anne\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html\",\"name\":\"Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-07-13T09:00:24+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-10T12:40:37+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2\"},\"description\":\"In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I'm already exhausted!\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/\",\"name\":\"Love, Joy, Feminism\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2\",\"name\":\"Libby Anne\",\"description\":\"Libby Anne grew up in a large evangelical homeschool family highly involved in the Christian Right. College turned her world upside down, and she is today an atheist, a feminist, and a progressive. She blogs about leaving religion, her experience with the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, the detrimental effects of the \\\"purity culture,\\\" the contradictions of conservative politics, and the importance of feminism.\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/author\/libby\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair","description":"In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I'm already exhausted!","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair","og_description":"In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I'm already exhausted!","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html","og_site_name":"Love, Joy, Feminism","article_published_time":"2018-07-13T09:00:24+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-10T12:40:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":768,"height":576,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/166\/2018\/07\/judge-1587300_1920.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Libby Anne","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Libby Anne","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html","name":"Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website"},"datePublished":"2018-07-13T09:00:24+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-10T12:40:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2"},"description":"In other words, this hearing is going to be about procedural issues only. And thank goodness, because I'm already exhausted!","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2018\/07\/forbid-them-not-a-day-in-court.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Forbid Them Not: The Trevails of the Lawyer with Brilliant Silver Hair"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/","name":"Love, Joy, Feminism","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2","name":"Libby Anne","description":"Libby Anne grew up in a large evangelical homeschool family highly involved in the Christian Right. College turned her world upside down, and she is today an atheist, a feminist, and a progressive. She blogs about leaving religion, her experience with the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, the detrimental effects of the \"purity culture,\" the contradictions of conservative politics, and the importance of feminism.","sameAs":["http:\/\/patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/author\/libby"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37678","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/845"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=37678"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37678\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/37702"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37678"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37678"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37678"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}