ujm
“Fourthly, we both know that there’s more cash income not reflected in the statistics.”
The point I have tried to make again and again is that this all goes back to welfare. Reduce reliance on welfare and the SC will not tolerate the State interfering as was the case with Yoder. If the above point you claim is true, then the fraudulent reliance on welfare in such a case reflects poor education in being part of the larger society and would support fare worse intrusion by the State into our education.
And despite all your contentions about the Yoder case the self-sufficiency of the Amish community is a key element as the court balanced the state’s interests versus religious rights. Because they were self-sufficient as evidenced by rejecting welfare the state could not make a good enough argument that they had a strong enough interest to outweigh the religious rights. Had they not been self-sufficient (e.g. heavy reliance on welfare) hard to imagine the outcome would be the same.