​He is referred to as a Constitutional Attorney (although this writer has found following KrisAnne Hall to be more truthful when it comes to constitutional law). He is the Executive Director of ParentalRights.org; founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) and Chancellor of Patrick Henry College. Home Schooler’s parents all over the country look to Farris almost as their protector and savior from the big bad wolves and I see him as a wolf. His total distortion in regards to the Parental Rights Act (PRA) is leading all parents down a path of parental rights destruction.
 
The Declaration of Independence tells us our Rights come from God not the government; they are inalienable. The very purpose of the government is to SECURE those rights God gave to us and when the government seeks to take away our rights it is time to throw them out with the “bath water”. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights enumerates 30 + rights and states they come from “man” (constitution or laws). Not God but Man! Wrong!
 
Now to take a look at Michael Farris web site parentalrights.org and see what he says about our Rights. If you take the time to go to the web site you will see that once again it is being stated parental rights are coming from the Constitution and not God - that they are fundamental rights not unalienable rights. So now from what I read on the PR website they state:
 
Today the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) is approaching a possible ratification by the United States Senate. This treaty, as harmless as it may appear, is capable of attacking the very core of the child-parent relationship, removing parents from their central role in the growth and development of a child, and replacing them with the long arm of government supervision within the home.
 
If as Mr. Farris wishes he succeeds in getting the Parental Rights amendment passed it will become part of the Constitution – no longer overseen by the Declaration of Independence and as such if the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children is passed the parental control will be taken over by the UN. Do Mr. Farris’ supports realize what kind of hornets nest they are opening?
 
I will take Mr. Farris’ own words and turn them back on him. Yes the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is a very dangerous document and must never be agreed to by the United States; however, Mr. Farris uses that as an example to his followers as the very reason to support his PRA when they are no different. I wonder if some of the very religious Home School families realize this.
 
Now Mr. Farris, for unclear reasons, has decided we should put our entire Constitution on the line in aiding those who wish to firm up our country as a Democracy or even worse Tyranny by government.
 
From Publius Hildah Parental rights:  God-given and Unalienable? Or Government-granted and Revocable? 7/2-/13) Farris uses Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s Dissent in Troxel v. Granville (2000) using this to support his own theory that unless a right is enumerated in the federal Constitution, judges can't enforce it, and the right can't be protected. 
Some feel that Farris a "reconstructionistm but he states:  "(T)here are those" writes Farris, "who advocate the idea that America should enact the Old Testament law right down to the rules for conducting trials."
"I am not one of those people," he declares, "but I do believe the moral principles of God apply to every age. The principles of the Ten Commandments, for example, will forever be valid and should be honored in modern America."

Reconstructionism asserts that the laws of Old Testament Israel should apply today, providing a biblical blueprint for society. Pure Reconstructionism embraces a wide use of the death penalty — not only for such crimes as rape and murder, but for blasphem y, heresy, astrology, and homosexuality — in accordance with what they call "biblical law" — a nation which largely grows out of biblical accounts of the judicial application of the Ten Commandments.

There are evangelical leaders who waffle on Reconstructionism, the way some politicians waffle on issues of public policy. In Michael Farris, we have an evangelical politician, waffling on his beliefs as they relate to public policy. Indeed, Farris writes that "as a matter of strategy" it's good to conceal the biblical root of one's views and stress matters of "right and wrong."