Andy, after struggling with your post, I think I have to agree with you. There’s still something that is bothering me but I think that the merits are on your side.
As for what’s bothering me, it’s not so much your reasoning as the cultural and political context of the decision. Since the Progressive era there has been a certain streak of hostility to parental rights on the left (await my book for copious evidence of this). It pops up from time to time. And this seems to be one of those instances. Surely there are rights not enumerated in the Constitution which we all hold and if the right to be the captains of our children’s upbringing isn’t one of them I cannot imagine what right would be. Obviously it’s not an absolute right. We can’t murder our children — once the umbilical cord is cut, that is. But teaching them about right and wrong with minimal interference of the state strikes me as a much closer call. Decisions like this seem intended to give the maximum latitude for the state to take the lead in that department.
As you note, you understand the selectivity of the court’s strict constructionism. And, ultimately, as I said I agree with you. But there’s still something that stinks about it. There’s no way parents in California are going to fix this through the democratic process any time soon. Which is why more people are going to “vote with their kids” and either leave the state or homeschool, which will only accelerate the cultural trends for the families left behind. California will get bluer and bluer and bluer.