This should be overturned quickly...

This is maddening... I thought we had this little thing called "FREEDOM OF RELIGION" and "SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE" ....

What's next? Judge saying it's illegal to even worship a pagan religion? Tossing people in jail because of it? It's sickening... and it it makes what little pride I had for this country dwindle even lower...

Thats sick, thats really sick. Are children not raised to follow chritiantity freely? whats the difference
I'm not particuarly religiuous- but surely this defeats thew point of equal rights?

This sounds like a dispute between mum and dad; am I getting this right?

I got infuriated when I read that news article. I can't believe the judge would dare to ever do something like that; it's not only 100% against the law, but it shows even I have better knowledge of the law than a court judge!

Wicca is a nationally recognized religion for a reason, and with first amendment protections for a reason. This violates quite a few protections given to it, and this judge needs to be removed and replaced by a real judge as soon as possible.

My pride for this country is also getting lower. In my eyes, the Supreme Court is the last stronghold in our government that is not more than 50% corrupted. When Chief Justice Renquist dies and a new Cheif Justice is sworn in, I foresee this balance turning to unbalance and the Surpeme Court failing. If things like banning somebody from practicing or learning Wicca are accepted [even though it is a serious violation of the law] and republicans want to get rid of the fillibuster for judges, whats going to be next, nationally endorsed concentration camps?

If I was the President right now, I would have this judge answer to me, personally. I really wish the government would follow the values that the founding fathers laid out for them, instead of feed off their own "good intentions" which always lead to negativity. Washington would be turning over in his grave right now.

From the link that SC provided:



From the sounds of it both parents are Wiccan and want to bring up the son the same way.


Does "Big Brother" sound familiar?

I don't think this is important.
most adult wiccans didn't start off that way
does the phrase "find your own way" mean nothing to you people
hehe
see unlike the rest of the religious community wiccans choose their gods
Their gods don't choose them
As a committed pantheist myself I see nothing wrong with raising kids in any religious practice.
If they're smart enough later on to realise that "the word" they know is a lie then they change anyway.
if not.....who cares

It is contrary to send their son to a Catholic school, when both parents are Pagan. However, this may be because one side of the extended family (either via/ the side of the husband or wifes family), insists upon a Christian education and perhaps makes their familial atmosphere a living hades, unless their wishes are carried out. Especially if they do not approve of the Wiccan lifestyle/exposure , that their grandson is a part of. ( I speak from experience on that one. Catholic Mom-outlaw and all! She's very young for her age!)

I am grateful they named the judge in this case. He is clearly biased and yet hides behind his bias under color of law. He refuses to acknowledge in his order that the dispute in this matter could be settled by removing the child from the parochial institution that helps to draft the conflict in his review of the Bureau's report.

I hope the attorneys for the defense pursue this matter about the judges bias on another level, once this case is settled. In the mean time I would take council with my spouse and discuss enrolling our son in the public school system or perhaps a home school program. Regardless though, I would never stop practicing my faith , nor would I prohibit my son from being a part of what sustains our family, as a unit whether we live apart or not, spiritually!

1994, "Detmer vs. Landon" State Supreme Court of Virginia. This judge should curb his ignorance of the law and read that decision. And then perhaps he would realize, in a perfect world, and a counter suit against his violation, he is afforded the oportunity to witness his future in robes flash before his eyes. As he sought to set the right of religious freedom to flight for this family, and thereby broadcast to others within his jurisdiction that he also poses a threat to their exercise of religious freedom as well!

And BTW, a jurist does not posture to uphold religious freedom when one has commanded, under that authority, no choice but to adhere to a mandate who's platform is applied as un-constitutional and illegal, authoritarianism!

I burn my candles within the sight of Goddess Maat, that she witness this offense and uphold the promise the laws made to a people in the long ago; set this family free in the name of freedom and justice, for all.

Accually this *is* importaint because it is a serious violation of one of our ammendments of garunteed freedoms... And there are plenty of pagan parents out there who do wish to raise thier kids as such, and have every right to.

Having a judge inforce adifferent religion onto them is akin to what we had in the middle ages when those in power thrusted christianity on pagan peoples. It's a great cause for outrage. First a judge says that unless it's a judaic/christian prayer, then it's banned... now it's "And you can't raise your kids that way either!"

When should we stop? When the entire country is tossing people in jail for worshiping pagan values and gods?

If you look at Marduk's profile you will see that he is from England.

As humans it is important.
May I ask what you are using for reference?
That is what they were doing before they divorced. Both are practicing Wiccans and want to bring their child up as such.
You mean to say that Christians do not chose their God but he choses them? I thought you meant that "You find your own way".
Pantheist:

It seems like you are not showing much tolerance here right now.
SOURCE
If the parents were Christian perhaps they realized the "WORD" they were taught was false and changed to Wicca.

How very naive.




"I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others." Thomas Jefferson



First They Came For The Jews

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me."

Pastor Martin Niemöller



If your not outraged your not paying attention. If you don't care, your not yet effected by discrimination. If your not careful, you will be next.

Yes

Funny thing is, that if this judge said "you cannot practice Christianity" then it would still be posted here on UM, and everyone would be happy.

don't be silly. freedom of choice is only freedom of choice if all choices are treated equally.

wow.. what a nice and cozy cop out of a post.

No, everyone would not be happy... people would still be just as outraged because that's still trambling on parental rights and granted freedoms.

Please... try again.

I think we both know the truth.

People would point the finger and laugh.

Now, I don't necessarily mean you personally.

However, I guarantee that many others would.

I highly doubt that _________ <--(insert atheist/non-christian person's name here), would come in here and say "gosh dangit!, they shouldn't do that!". If Christianity were involved.

Lest us remember the Salem witch trials.

And lest us remember that we are a differnt community and lead differnt lives, and we should not be banning people from following their choice and their freedom of that choice.

*shakes her head* One: We both know that that will never happen anyways. No jusdge will sit here and say "You can't riase your kid christian" So even with that, your tossing in a red herring.

two: You're still wrong thinking people will point and laugh. Save for maybe *maybe* one or two athiests... which last I knew.. one or two is not "many"

It'll probably get appealed and the supreme court will probably rule in favor of the parents. As someone stated earlier though, the supreme court will soon be unbalanced with the new judges that are going to be placed in.

Interesting point.

And in that same vein of observation, there are people on this board that may have read this article, pointed and laughed.

In either case it is ignorant to assume a cavalier attitude about a violation of one's right to exercise religious freedom or to subscribe to the notion that because it is a violation against a heathen practice, it is immaterial to the theist community.

That readers may Scoff at this attack on religious practice, is probable given the population of membership here and the opinions everyone are entitled to, when reading about this issue. However to do so, to find humor in the face of a report of criminal jurisprudence, or discount the impact of this decision, regardless of one's opinions of the faith in question, is to prove one is not only predisposed to religious bias, unaware of the import of totalitarianism, that is reflected in this decision.

One can hold any opinion of the concept of religious ideology. That's one thing the governments of any Nation can not effect; freedom of thought. However to point, laugh and believe that in the process one is qualified to feel superior to that which is befalling those they jeer, is to render one's self ignorant of the message behind the act. Simply said, don't laugh! If it can happen to them, under color of law, it can happen to you!

That's why you are free to think what you want to, while this decision, by this judge proves it might not always be the case. If your prohibited by law to practice faith, the law says your not free at all.

Now...if only they'd do this to Christianity and officially label it Child Abuse.

Manfred, you wouldn't be referring to the Capp's analysis et al, as the reason for that statement would you?

You insult me sir! I am first and foremost an American. I would defend your right to practice, teach, and pass on to your children your religion with my life. We are all in the same boat here. If my rights are taken away to practice my religion and teach it to my children then your rights are also forfeit. Anyone who says that this unimportant is a fool. Freedom of religion is one of our basic rights. This judge should be removed form the bench. He appears to know nothing of constitution. He is, therefore, incompetent.

Sometimes I wonder if John Titor really was from the future
The way the world is going...anyway, I wish you ALL heaven
*smells a lilac

Sometimes... I'm sorry I wasn't here for the John Titor moments... Something tells me I'd have loved talking to him...

You, Judges, who have never judged your lack of respect!

lol zandore
why so agitated
i am showing tolerance
as a pantheist i know that it doesn't matter which god you pray to.
as a reference i'm using my wiccan friends, i have quite a few and belong to a few non christian forums
and you can't see how a person choosing which god to wroship,. as in wicca is finding your own way. Did you get confused.
Adult wiccan do rarely start off with wiccan parents, thats why wiccans are in general far more spiritually aware and in tune with god. They notice something missing in teh faith they were raised in. That's true in about 90% of the wiccans i know.
So wether you worship Yahweh, mohommed, buddha, shiva, God Almight it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference. We all have immortal souls and life is very fleeting. Who you are and who you worship today is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I am a pantheist and i worship several gods
but i understand that they are all aspects of the greater power.
it just makes me feel comfortable to pray to something recognisable.
Thats cos i'm human.
Worshipping an individual rather than an entity allows me to focus and draw power a lot easier.
maybe you should try it.
hehehe

If you think i'm naieve about spirituality then you're either a complete and utter idiot, or uninformed

This is why it is so important to have Conservative judges on the bench!

Conservatives tend to view everything from the correct perspective....

Doesn't our Constitution guarantee us freedom of religion...yes it does...but these idiot judges want to Legislate from their benches....

Twas a conservitive judge that banned a wiccan minister from praying in public... He said that unless it's judaic/christian... it's not allowed...

And this guy is a conservitive democrate... Sorry.. but conservitism isn't just a rebuplican thing.

They're on both sides of the fence....

But the rest of your post.. freedom of religion is something I agree on... and I was right... first it's taking away the basic rights of the homosexuals... and now other religions that's not monotheistic...

Sadly SC, I think the article concerning this judge and his violation of our most basic rights, (though his decision effected this family, it is a precursor for all pagans in his jurisdiction), is just an example of what is to come.

Bush has still to seat new judges to the United States Supreme Court, and in a case like this I can assure you GW would support the judges position. That gives us an idea of what is to come, as he nominates those who are kindred spirits on the conservative platform, for the highest judicial authority in the land.


"I love my country, it's the government that scares me! "

"I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others." Thomas Jefferson
he forgot to add
"unless they're my slaves in which case i'll buy and sell them and to to them as i please"

always contradiction evry where u go...

I am absolutely ignorant about American history and culture. Did Thomas Jefferson have slaves?

Yes.. he had a whole plantation of slaves. There's even a group of african americans here that are of his lineage.. he er.. had a slave mistress.. to put it nicely...

I personally wouldn't go around quoting people that kept slaves.

That would kill alot of quotes...

Yes it would! And for Bill Clinton fan's it would really be a smack down, as Jefferson was his favorite president.


Aside from that, the fact that Jefferson kept slaves, a common practice unfortunately, in his day. (And he was not the only President to have slaves either.), does not negate the wisdom contained in his quotes. (*I'm presuming your referencing Jefferson quotes in your reply Cougar?*) Nor was America the only country that practiced slavery. *Link*

Holy Inquisition Judges

exactly! in public schools, history teachers can teach the pillars of islam, shinto, zen, etc. but they cant teach the ten commandments, or theyll lose their job. why is that?

really?

interesting....

religion (no matter which one) does not belong in the schools except as an academic option (study the how, why, where,.... of the religion)

schools should never teach religion AS a faith.

if what you say is true perhaps it is a backlash to the christain fundies pushing their anti-science/intelligent design hogwash!

Red Harring.

This is about *HOME* raising, not schools. Schools is a whole different kettle of fish.


And again, I HIGHLY doubt that if a judge banned parents to raise thier kids christian, would anyone here save maybe a slight handful would say "Good! I'm happy!"

The kid goes to a catholic school. Maybe the judge would have had better luck telling them they couldn't let the kid go to a catholic school. They also take him to church. I think with an upbringing like that the child with grow up with something that is a rare thing now a days, an open mind.
This is a proper Pagan way to raise children. Expose them to a lot of ideas and let them make their own mind when they are old enough. It is in the end the Child's Path.

Funny because I don't recall any teaching in the bible that says people should be anti-science.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable [inalienable] Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"
Thats another one of jeffersons iirc. lol
How do you think that sounded to his slaves. Do you think they thought that it might "negate the wisdom contained in his quotes"

My favourite american pres quotes are
"I am a doughnut" J.F.K.
and
"Be excellent to each other and Party on dudes" Abe Lincoln

Nope.. and yet.. that's the turn many fundiamentalists have gone. Mainly because science contraticts thier faith to it's core.

But still schools are not the issue here.

QUOTE(Amalgamut @ May 30 2005, 03:15 PM)

Funny because I don't recall any teaching in the bible that says people should be anti-science.
[right][snapback]647733[/snapback][/right]

Excerpt: (sic)"... So-called conflicts of science and the Bible are often conflicts between interpretations of the facts. While there are questions for which there are as yet no explanation, there is no fundamental conflict between science and Scripture." (*Source FaithFacts - Are Christians "Anti-Science"?

For me the statement in the excerpt above is succinct,in applying a bit of understanding to the conflict. It's all in the interpretation; just as religion is faith based, so to is science theoretical, and as such subject to changes in theory, as the science evolves. As is faith because people, politic and community change over time. Remember when the churches ruled the world, it was called the dark ages? Now we know that period of time as part of a history, fraught with the lessons exampled in the error of our ways, by abdicating reason for theocratic dictatorships.

And I think the term, "Evolution" is the one word what makes the chasm between the two ideologies of science and faith. Hence some believe there is a conflict if one dare lend credence to both philosophies.
I've talked with people of faith and often times they have said that they object to the term, "Evolution", because it is contrary to creationism and god. However I find that ironic in that the most basic description the term applies is,"change" and at the same time many who object to the theory of evolution, do so based on fundamentalist religious tenants.

An example of the schism between faith and change, is Galileo; who suffered in the face of the ignorance of this applied bias, and only received a formal apology for his persecution generations after his death. While, IMHO it is obvious something is responsible for all that we understand as reality and consciousness today, whether one wishes to ascribe it's genesis as that of the power of a deity or simply the "Big Bang" theory. The science of Archeology proves that the first humans, (taken as Adam & Eve in scripture), evolved/changed, over millennia unto what we know today as Homo sapiens and I think if we are to evolve in our understanding of our environment, terrestrial and extra-terrestrial, we need recognize that the history of human and the nature of our environment lends evidence that if one does not change, it is doomed to extinction.

So to I think is the seeming conflict between faith and theory, if we do not realize change is inevitable, whether our ego's recognize it or not. If we wish an accord between the two frontiers thought (faith and science), we need not be threatened by one another and embrace the understanding that one can embrace god as creator and still accept that it is necessary to survival for that which is created to evolve over time. That's why we have studies in history, archeology, anthropology, theology (which is replete with examples of evolution/change, in it's own right ) , etc... Because as we move toward the future, it is inevitable that we leave our past behind.

Christians aren't anti- science. i go to a Christian school, and we still learn about the sciences, such as biology, physics, and chemistry. we aren't anti- science. we just dont like sciences that condradict our teachings, such as evolution.

you should realize that evo does not contradict your theology.

the contradictions to theology are, shall we say, far more basic.

That is what they told Galileo.

You can not adapt science to religion, but you can adapt religion to science.
Science is not culture it is provable data. Religion is an opinion, it requires no proof and is culture. Culture adapts and changes so that it remains useful to sociality. Think how much religion has changed in the last few hundred years.

religion hasnt changed all that much, it's the people that follow it that change science is a culture in your terms too, it changes as people discover more and more stuff.