For illustration, in holding that the plainly significant point out interest in community instruction really should give way to a competing claim by the Amish to the influence that extended formal schooling threatened their way of lifetime, the Court declared: "There can be no assumption that present-day majority is 'right' and the Amish and other individuals like them are 'wrong.' A way of existence that is odd or even erratic but interferes with no legal rights or pursuits of others is not to be condemned due to the fact it is various." Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. Oral Arg. 33. More importantly, the procedural posture of the scenario necessitates that we affirm the Court of Appeals' judgment if there is any ground on which respondent may well be entitled to relief. I hence see no foundation for the Court's decision to handle this case as an "as used" challenge to 16-6-2, see ante, at 188, n. Cf. ante, at 188, n.
