Judge: Parents can't teach pagan beliefs

[wvrevy]

Of all the ignorant, stupid, moronic decisions I have ever seen come from a judge, this is the worst! I hope they appeal. This is absurd. And since when is Wicca not main stream? Look around you, judge. This is a very common fiath today. And even if it weren't, so what? Why should it matter?

Yes, the conflict in the 2 faiths may be confusing, but the judge has no right to determine which faith is the only one that can be taught. Let the kid learn both and make up his own mind if his parents have different faiths.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[wvrevy]

There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion. None. Ever. Period.

 

[Cebhfhionn]

While I don't quite understand why Wiccan parents would send their child to Catholic school I have even more trouble understanding why any judge would make such a ruling.

Well, I am Wiccan and my DH is an Atheist and our son went to Catholic school while we were still in NJ. Why? Initially because our public schools did not offer a full day kindergarten and the Catholic school did. Then we kept him there, the education is generally better because the classes are smaller.

So, that said, I am disgusted that a judge can decide what is a 'real' religion and what isn't.

I'm sure that they will get to someone that will overturn this stupid ruling.

 

[totalia]

This judge needs to be removed. This is highly prejudice and illegal.

 

[GaryAdams]

There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion. None. Ever. Period.

See right here is a good reason why this poster doesnt have a clue when they post.
if we are to believe this poster he is condoning what took place in louisiana.
Like he said

There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion. None. Ever. Period.

http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louis...ews-16/11165274006040.xml&storylist=louisiana

Four members of 'cult-like' church charged with abusing children
5/19/2005, 3:32 p.m. CT
The Associated Press

PONCHATOULA, La. (AP) — Within the walls of Hosanna Church in this southeastern Louisiana town, children, dogs and cats were sexually abused by a minister and his "cult-like" group of members, authorities alleged.


So far, four people — including a sheriff's deputy — have been jailed and authorities say as many as a dozen adults may have been involved in victimizing as many as 24 children, ranging in age from infants to teens.

The case broke when church pastor Louis Lamonica walked into the sheriff's office Monday and allegedly started talking about the crimes and his involvement and giving the names of others.

"He said he was educating the children in sexual exploits and how to have sex," said Livingston Parish sheriff's Detective Stan Carpenter. "We didn't know how to take it. The man just came in off the street."

Lamonica, 45, was arrested and booked on two counts of aggravated rape and one count of crime against nature.

A day later, authorities acting on information provided by Lamonica arrested 24-year-old sheriff's Deputy Christopher Blair Labat on counts of aggravated rape and malfeasance. He was fired and placed on a jailhouse suicide watch.

Later Tuesday, Austin Bernard, 36, who authorities said worked with the youth group at the church, was charged with allegedly forcing a girl under the age of 13 to perform a sex act. Then came the arrest of Allen R. Pierson, 46, who lived in an apartment on the church complex and was accused of raping a girl who was 9 or 10.

Labat apparently once lived in one of three apartments at the complex, as did Bernard, said Chuck Reed, a spokesman for the Tangipahoa Parish sheriff.

All were jailed without bond. Rape of a child under 13 carries a possible death sentence in Louisiana. Reed said he did not believe any of those arrested had hired attorneys.

Ponchatoula, located about 40 miles north of New Orleans on the other side of Lake Pontchartrain, is known for its rustic shopping district and antique stores and as the home of the annual Louisiana strawberry festival.

The investigation that shook this town of about 5,000 opened five weeks ago when a woman called from Columbus, Ohio, saying she had fled from Louisiana out of fear for her child after learning about the sex practices of some of the Hosanna Church's members.

"There are probably more than a dozen persons of interest beyond the four that are under arrest and there may be twice that many victims involved," Reed said.

Some of those being investigated are parents of the victims, who either knew about the alleged abuse or harmed their own children, authorities said.

Not all of the church members knew about the alleged sex acts, which authorities believe began in 1999 and likely ended when the church closed its doors to the general public around 2003. The alleged acts apparently took place in classrooms on the church property and not in the sanctuary.

"Apparently some of the members of the church probably spun off from what was a legitimate church and kind of formed what you and I might call a cult, and did cult-like things," Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff Daniel Edwards said.

Edwards said the group used dogs and cats in some of the alleged acts, but he did not elaborate.

Reed said Hosanna Church was founded by Lamonica's father, who died years ago, and was once affiliated with the Assemblies of God. Authorities suspect the alleged abuse began after the younger Lamonica took over the church, it left the Assemblies of God and a large number of its members left, Reed said.

Authorities searched the church Tuesday night and turned two computers and a carpet sample over to state police. The FBI is assisting in the investigation because of the possibility that some of the alleged acts were taped and child pornography laws would apply.

Notice this part,

Some of those being investigated are parents of the victims, who either knew about the alleged abuse or harmed their own children, authorities said.

WOW,thats scary that revy doesnt think that these parents should be Prosecuted or be held accountable because the judge doesnt have a right to.
These sickos say it was a church,its a religion,but as revy says,

There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion. None. Ever. Period.

Sad very sad.

 

[Marseeya]

See right here is a good reason why this poster doesnt have a clue when they post.
if we are to believe this poster he is condoning what took place in louisiana.
Like he said



.

I hate when people have to bring up extreme and rare examples to try to prove somebody wrong. How deep did you have to dig for this one?

 

[dcentity2000]

See right here is a good reason why this poster doesnt have a clue when they post.
if we are to believe this poster he is condoning what took place in louisiana.

How very malicious



Rich::

 

[auntpolly]

Judges make bad decisions all the time. This one will be overturned.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

See right here is a good reason why this poster doesnt have a clue when they post.
if we are to believe this poster he is condoning what took place in louisiana.
Like he said

http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louis...ews-16/11165274006040.xml&storylist=louisiana

Four members of 'cult-like' church charged with abusing children
5/19/2005, 3:32 p.m. CT
The Associated Press

Notice this part,

WOW,thats scary that revy doesnt think that these parents should be Prosecuted or be held accountable because the judge doesnt have a right to.
These sickos say it was a church,its a religion,but as revy says,

Sad very sad.

I am not presuming to speak for wvrevy. I happen to agree with what he posted: "There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion. None. Ever. Period."

No one that I know of -- at least no reasonable person (I would hope) would believe that the Constitutional right of freedom of religion grants anyone license to commit illegal acts such as child molestation or rape. It is absurd to state that wvrevy's statement implies a belief that the people in Louisiana should not be prosecuted.

It appears it is necessary to be terribly verbose in order to avoid possible misinterpretation. Maybe this would help, Gary?

There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion as long as what the parents teach is not illegal under local, state or federal laws and does not violate the child's constitutional and civil rights. None. Ever. Period.

Does that make it clear?

 

[Cheap-n-Dale]

WOW,thats scary that revy doesnt think that these parents should be Prosecuted or be held accountable because the judge doesnt have a right to.
These sickos say it was a church,its a religion,but as revy says,


Sad very sad.

I don't think that any rational thinking person would consider forcing children to have sex to be part and parcel of "teaching children about religion" This is an asinine post.

 

[Planogirl]

See right here is a good reason why this poster doesnt have a clue when they post.
if we are to believe this poster he is condoning what took place in louisiana.

http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louis...ews-16/11165274006040.xml&storylist=louisiana

WOW,thats scary that revy doesnt think that these parents should be Prosecuted or be held accountable because the judge doesnt have a right to.
These sickos say it was a church,its a religion,but as revy says,

Sad very sad.

You would actually believe that these sickos are part of some type of religion? And you would really say in all seriousness that revy was including these people in his point?

You can be awfully bizarre sometimes.

 

[wvrevy]

See right here is a good reason why this poster doesnt have a clue when they post.
if we are to believe this poster he is condoning what took place in louisiana.
Like he said



http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louis...ews-16/11165274006040.xml&storylist=louisiana

Four members of 'cult-like' church charged with abusing children
5/19/2005, 3:32 p.m. CT
The Associated Press



Notice this part,



WOW,thats scary that revy doesnt think that these parents should be Prosecuted or be held accountable because the judge doesnt have a right to.
These sickos say it was a church,its a religion,but as revy says,



Sad very sad.

Actually, that's about abuse, not about religion.

But I see I don't need to really say that, since several already pointed it out. But thanks for playing...Please try again.

 

[Galahad]

Glad to hear a Hoosier chime in on this. Even for Indiana, it is a rather extreme ruling. Maybe the school weighed in on the issue as it may have caused conflict with him and the school, rather than between his "conflicting" beliefs. I do find it interesting that a Hoosier can find some merrit to the Judges position. Not meant to be insulting to Hoosiers, but just illustrating why we have states, and are able to live in places that closely mirror our own views/beliefs.

Despite the father's claim to organising Pagan festivals, Wiccan is most definately not the norm in Indiana. In fact, I can tell you from experience that the majority of Hoosier communities, while "knowing" that Paganism is the "Devil's work", Wiccan may as well be Vegan. I can easily see where there would be problems for this youg man, attending a Christian faith school and trying to adhear to his Pagan beliefs. Still, the judge is wrong.

There are wacko judges all over the country. This is not a function of being in the State of Indiana. I don't know many Hoosiers that would find merit in his position.

 

[DisDuck]

So based on this judge's ruling my MIL should have been forced to raised Catholic as she attended Catholic school and would have had conflicts between her parents religion and the schools teachings after the government closed down all Jewish religious schools.

 

[jgmklmhem]

Going to play devil's advocate.... I am just wondering though if the boy has made the choice (yes he is only 9) that he doesn't want this confusion in his life and for whatever reason has choosen to believe the Catholic teachings and not his parents and has asked the judge to help him out. In my hypothetical where do the parent's rights end and the child's in this case begin. His parents rightly or wrongly have put this child into what could be a very confusing situation. What if the child has privately told the judge I can't take it and I want to be Catholic (because he wants to be like his peers, or because he has choosen his beliefs to be more in line with them or whatever) and his parents refuse to leave him be and are forcing him to learn their religion "against his will". In this case the judges ruling would be for the welfare of the child. I would believe in my hypothetical to be right if the tables were turned the other way as well. Nine may be a little young to make this decision....but then at what age would it be appropriate.

 

[septbride2002]

I am not presuming to speak for wvrevy. I happen to agree with what he posted: "There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion. None. Ever. Period."

No one that I know of -- at least no reasonable person (I would hope) would believe that the Constitutional right of freedom of religion grants anyone license to commit illegal acts such as child molestation or rape. It is absurd to state that wvrevy's statement implies a belief that the people in Louisiana should not be prosecuted.

It appears it is necessary to be terribly verbose in order to avoid possible misinterpretation. Maybe this would help, Gary?

There is NO situation - none, nada, zip, zero, NEVER - where a judge would be justified telling parents what they can teach their children about religion as long as what the parents teach is not illegal under local, state or federal laws and does not violate the child's constitutional and civil rights. None. Ever. Period.

Does that make it clear?

Well said! Gary Adams, although Tigger_magic and I have disagreed on SEVERAL different topics this is how you DEBATE - WITH INTELLIGENCE! Please don't bother any of us with your extreme examples, all it does it make you lose crediblity with your audience.

Thanks,
Amanda

 

[wvrevy]

Going to play devil's advocate.... I am just wondering though if the boy has made the choice (yes he is only 9) that he doesn't want this confusion in his life and for whatever reason has choosen to believe the Catholic teachings and not his parents and has asked the judge to help him out. In my hypothetical where do the parent's rights end and the child's in this case begin. His parents rightly or wrongly have put this child into what could be a very confusing situation. What if the child has privately told the judge I can't take it and I want to be Catholic (because he wants to be like his peers, or because he has choosen his beliefs to be more in line with them or whatever) and his parents refuse to leave him be and are forcing him to learn their religion "against his will". In this case the judges ruling would be for the welfare of the child. I would believe in my hypothetical to be right if the tables were turned the other way as well. Nine may be a little young to make this decision....but then at what age would it be appropriate.

Doesn't matter. A judge has no business telling a parent what they can or can't try to teach their child in terms of religion. Would say exactly the same if it were christian parents trying to get their child to not be a wiccan. So long as it isn't an abusive situation (that line's just for anybody dumb enough to think I'm not including rape and ritual torture in the description), courts have no right to tell a parent that they can't teach a child that the spot of bird crap on the windshield is actually a divine message from their spiritual overlord, Zaphod Beeblebrox.

Courts must stay out of the religion business. Period. This idiot judge will be overturned.

 

[septbride2002]

Going to play devil's advocate.... I am just wondering though if the boy has made the choice (yes he is only 9) that he doesn't want this confusion in his life and for whatever reason has choosen to believe the Catholic teachings and not his parents and has asked the judge to help him out. In my hypothetical where do the parent's rights end and the child's in this case begin. His parents rightly or wrongly have put this child into what could be a very confusing situation. What if the child has privately told the judge I can't take it and I want to be Catholic (because he wants to be like his peers, or because he has choosen his beliefs to be more in line with them or whatever) and his parents refuse to leave him be and are forcing him to learn their religion "against his will". In this case the judges ruling would be for the welfare of the child. I would believe in my hypothetical to be right if the tables were turned the other way as well. Nine may be a little young to make this decision....but then at what age would it be appropriate.

As I've been told many times - Children are not given the same rights as adults. And unless this child wants to be imancipated from his parents then his parents are still calling the shots. If he wants to be Catholic then he can do so at 18. I think 9 is way to young to be making any decisions when it comes to religions.

~Amanda

 

[Cebhfhionn]

Why is it that the child cannot learn about more than one religion? Even in the Catholic schools as another person posted, they learn about different religions. Wicca is generally not one of the ones but perhaps it should be

 

[Galahad]

FYI -

The Latest follow up story in the Indy Star:

Paganism ruling stirs outcry
Experts expect court to overturn order that bars divorced pair from exposing son to Wicca.


By Kevin Corcoran
kevin.corcoran@indystar.com
May 27, 2005


A court order prohibiting a Marion County father and his ex-wife from exposing their son to "non-mainstream religious beliefs" is likely to be reversed, legal experts said Thursday.

However, publicity about the divorce case could help better educate people about Wicca, a contemporary pagan religion, said Andrew Koppelman, a Northwestern University law professor.

Cale J. Bradford, chief judge of Marion Superior Court, kept the unusual provision in Thomas E. Jones Jr. and Tammie U. Bristol's divorce decree last year over their protests, court records show. The parents are practicing Wiccans, and their divorce decree does not define a mainstream religion.

The Indiana Civil Liberties Union and Jones assert the judge's order tramples on the parents' constitutional right to expose their son, Archer, to a religion of their choice. Both say the court failed to explain how exposing the boy to Wicca's beliefs and practices would harm him.

Debate swirled in pagan religious circles locally and nationally after The Indianapolis Star reported on the case Thursday. Jones, 37, said he posted messages on two Web sites Thursday in an attempt to keep pagans from sending e-mail and letters of protest to Bradford.

"I've posted pleas for them to leave him alone," Jones said.

Through a court spokeswoman, Bradford has said he cannot discuss the pending legal dispute. The Indiana Court of Appeals could rule at any time.

Experts say an appellate ruling is likely to go in Jones' favor.

"Parents have a constitutional right to direct the upbringing of their children. That has been settled for nearly a century," said Koppelman, an expert in constitutional law.

"This case has got to be reversed, given the lack of explanation by the judge. It would be bad enough if he had singled out Wicca, but he has phrased it in such broad terms there's an argument the child could not be allowed to attend Jewish or Muslim services."

Before the appeals court would consider constitutional issues of religious freedom, however, it's more likely to fault a decision by one of Bradford's commissioners to include the one-paragraph restriction without showing actual or potential harm to the child, said an Indiana family law attorney.

"This decision should be frightening to people of any faith, because who decides what's mainstream?" said Donna Bays, chairwoman of the Family Law Section of the Indiana State Bar Association. "I have never seen a judge put anything like that in any order involving parties who were in agreement. "

Indiana law allows the custodial parent to determine a child's religious practices unless a child's physical health would be endangered or a child's emotional health would be impaired.

She said courts typically take the child's wishes into account when determining custody for those at least 14. In this case, a temporary guardian or special advocate could have been appointed while the court investigated the effects of the boy's exposure to Wicca.

Jones brought the case to the Indiana Court of Appeals in January, with help from the ICLU. They requested the appeals court strike the one-paragraph clause.

The parents' Wiccan beliefs came to Bradford's attention in a confidential report by the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau, which provides recommendations to the court on child custody and visitation rights.

The Indianapolis residents married in February 1995, and their divorce was final in February 2004. Bristol and Jones have joint custody, and the boy lives with the father on the Northside.

The parents believe in nature-based deities and engage in worship rituals that include guided meditation. Jones said he is not trying to force religious beliefs on his 9-year-old son, who attends a local Catholic elementary school and a Unitarian church.

"He's going to make his own path, in his own time," Jones said.

Pagans encounter so many problems with the legal system that Dana Eilers, a retired attorney from Massachusetts, wrote "Pagans and the Law: Understand Your Rights." Eilers said Thursday she heard about the local case through the pagan community and couldn't believe it.

"What it looks like is the judge has just pre-empted the parents and said, 'No, this is how you're going to do it.' "

Key quote:

"This decision should be frightening to people of any faith, because who decides what's mainstream?" said Donna Bays, chairwoman of the Family Law Section of the Indiana State Bar Association. "I have never seen a judge put anything like that in any order involving parties who were in agreement. "

I agree that he will be overturned.