Originally Posted by pan6467

See that is where our differences lie. I choose to believe freedom of religion means that we have the right to worship how we choose without any harrassments from anyone else, esp. a government. I believe our Constitution and the Bill Of Rights were written to protect ALL, especially the minorities. If we choose not to protect the minorities then we have thrown the Bill of Rights out of the window, and eventually all minorities will be looked upon as inferior.

To say the Constitution gives Christians or any religion the right to challenge or use political power (as in this case) to regulate how a person should worship or what the parent teaches the child or to discredit another religion is ludicrous.

In my 37 (very soon to be 38) years, I have found that how a person worships or their spirituality is very sacred to them, a part of who they are and very much individualized. I find any argument calling someone's spirituality or religion "wrong, shallow, fringe or whatever" a problem lying more with the individual labeling than with the individual being true to oneself.

Granted most religions preach that they are "the one anointed" and any other is wrong, however, who is to truly say what philosophy or style God really deems is the correct one. I am not God, I cannot pass judgement on how another worships because that entitles others to pass judgement on my form of worship and I will not allow that. And noone should, how you worship is between your God and you.

To pass your beliefs to your child is no more wrong than than passing on any other cultural belief system. To teach your child that there are other systems of beliefs and that when the child is old enough to decide the parent will gladly accept IS the best any parent can do in that situation.

I believe that the parents in question are doing just that. Showing the child their ways and beliefs but allowing him to be of open mind and to learn other forms of worship (this is shown by their allowance of sending the child to a Parochial school). This is also far more rewarding and mind opening to the child in my opinion. For when the child matures he will see what many fail to allow themselves or their children to see, and that is there are other ways of thinking and not all are right and not all are wrong but one must learn what is best for oneself and not pass judgements on others.

I see this as more of a way for children and adults to share and learn from each other and I see this as a sanctimonious government and a controlling religious group as working to prevent such experiences and growth.

Just because a smaller percentage worships a different way does not mean that way is wrong. It may be wrong for many and many may not understand but that is no reason to hold that belief system as wrong and insignificant, or non mainstream and therefore should not be taught to their children.

The question is if we allow this to set a precedent, who is to say that Shaoism, Taoism, Hindu, Buddhism, Scientology, Aetherius Society and even some Christian denominations such as Seventh Day Adventism, Jehovah's Witness, Christian Scientism, won't face the same criticism and governmental interventions because their numbers are not significant?