Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
I do too, all I want to know is are we getting all the facts or is there more in the report then has been released.
Its very easy for the press to fuck up a story, misslead, and missrepresent. I am wondering was it truely a case of religious intolerance, or was there more to it. We are only getting one side here as stated
Since the judge isn't allowed to speak about the case, we have to take the parents word. I'd like to know more before I get my panties in a bunch. If the judge is basing this over personal opinion only it should be overturned faster than a 9th Circus court ruling.
|
I see so now it's a press issue for you.
First you insinuate Wicca as a cult, then you compare Wicca with Heaven's Gate, and now the press isn't telling the full story.
Let's see, the first article and most found online come from the Indy Star. Having lived in Indy (12th and Rochester '94-'95) I know firsthand that the paper is one of the most conservative in the nation. I don't think they would try to put a "liberal bias" on anything.
Also the article says why the ruling was included (from a previous posting of one of the articles):
Quote:
A court commissioner wrote the unusual order after a routine report by the court's Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau noted that both Jones and his ex-wife are pagans who send their son, Archer, to a Catholic elementary school.
In the order, the parents were "directed to take such steps as are needed to shelter Archer from involvement and observation of these non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals." The judge let the wording stand.
|
I have attended many Wiccan rituals and I have found them more loving, caring and individualistic than most Christian rituals. Nor does ANY Wiccan friend I meet ever put down another religion in any way, push their beliefs onto me, they are in fact probably the most accepting of others group that I have ever met. I can not say the same for mainstream Christianity.
Also, Wiccan is not something that just sprouted, it can be traced farther back than Christianity.
If the judge had cause to leave the ruling in, I believe he would have been smart enough to word the ruling better. I just think this is a case where the Religious Right has so scared judges that they are willing to throw rights away to appease.
I find the wording very offensive, condemning and prejudicial, if the child were in any danger I am sure that would have been brought out. Instead, to just state that (the parents have been)"directed to take such steps as are needed to shelter Archer from involvement and observation of these non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals.", is simplistic and cannot be read in any other way than prejudicial and self serving to the author.
Christ was a great teacher of love, acceptance and understanding. Unfortunately, in organized Christianity the leaders view the religion as a means for power by spreading fear and prejudice, and this ruling is proof of that. That practice of those in control of the Christian churches, IMHO goes against everything Christ taught. But that is another thread for a different forum.