Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - The Government is now attacking "non mainstream religions"

cellophanedeity · 05-31-2005, 06:28 PM

I'm quite suprised that I hadn't heard of this case before now. I disagree with the judge's ruling. I think that people should have the right to raise their children in whichever faith that they feel is best suited for them and the child, despite marital status.

I don't know the details of the case, of course, and so I can't start screaming at one side. Perhaps there is more to this that we're missing? Perhaps the parents sacrifice goldfish and encourage the kid to eat peyote. I don't know, but I do believe that until it is proven that what you are teaching is harmful, or at least illegal, then it should be an option.

I was raised without a god, and instead with values and introductions to spiritualities, and I tend to think that this was the best possible way to be raised. But that's my business. No one elses. I wouldn't stop a Catholic family from teaching Catholic ideas, I wouldn't stop Sikhs from practising Sikhism, and I won't stop pagans from doing their thing.

I think that this ruling is fundamentally wrong, based upon my understanding of freedom of religion and the little I know of this case.

05-31-2005, 06:28 PM	#62 (permalink)
cellophanedeity Heliotrope Location: A warm room	I'm quite suprised that I hadn't heard of this case before now. I disagree with the judge's ruling. I think that people should have the right to raise their children in whichever faith that they feel is best suited for them and the child, despite marital status. I don't know the details of the case, of course, and so I can't start screaming at one side. Perhaps there is more to this that we're missing? Perhaps the parents sacrifice goldfish and encourage the kid to eat peyote. I don't know, but I do believe that until it is proven that what you are teaching is harmful, or at least illegal, then it should be an option. I was raised without a god, and instead with values and introductions to spiritualities, and I tend to think that this was the best possible way to be raised. But that's my business. No one elses. I wouldn't stop a Catholic family from teaching Catholic ideas, I wouldn't stop Sikhs from practising Sikhism, and I won't stop pagans from doing their thing. I think that this ruling is fundamentally wrong, based upon my understanding of freedom of religion and the little I know of this case.