<body><iframe src="http://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID=9117732&amp;blogName=Indy+Christian+.com+--+Daily+Internet...&amp;publishMode=PUBLISH_MODE_FTP&amp;navbarType=BLUE&amp;layoutType=CLASSIC&amp;homepageUrl=http%3A%2F%2Findychristian.com%2Fdefault.htm&amp;searchRoot=http%3A%2F%2Fblogsearch.google.com%2F" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" height="30px" width="100%" id="navbar-iframe" title="Blogger Navigation and Search"></iframe> <div id="space-for-ie"></div>

'Accelerating Driven Christians in the Racing Capital of the World'
  Indy Timeline:    What's coming up?             

Saturday, May 28, 2005

Child of Wiccan parents subjected to conflicting faiths

By James Patterson (email)



A court order that prohibits a divorced couple from teaching their child a pagan religion was the right decision, even though the controversial ruling is likely to be overturned on appeal.

Marion County Superior Court Judge Cale J. Bradford decided to leave intact a provision in the divorce decree of Thomas E. Jones Jr. and his ex-wife, Tammie U. Bristol, that prohibits them from exposing their 9-year-old son to "non-mainstream religious beliefs."

The parents believe in Wicca, a pagan faith connected to the practice of witchcraft. The provision in the couple’s divorce degree has been appealed by the child’s father and the Indiana Civil Liberties Union. It has also been the subject of much commentary on Wiccan websites. But Bradford’s order makes perfect sense to most Indianapolis Christians.

For instance, state law gives the custodial parent wide discretion over the child’s religious training, unless it would negatively impact his physical or emotional health. Since the boy attends a Catholic elementary school and a Unitarian church, according to The Indianapolis Star, there is reason to believe that his mental and emotional stability would be compromised by allowing him to receive additional instruction in a pagan religion.

Such religious training would be ambiguous. The boy would be bombarded with different faiths, and could easily be confused over which teaching represents the truth. There are stark differences over what Christians believe and what’s taught in pagan religious circles. For example, some Wiccans practice a form of Wicca that involves nudity. The boy’s father, however, said nudity wasn’t a part of his Wiccan practice.

Although the language in Bradford’s ruling may be too broad to stand in the appeals court, he is right to raise concern over what effect that indoctrinating the child in conflicting religious doctrine could have on his mental or emotional stability.

A simple Internet search for Wiccan websites turned up the following: Blue moon: The Most Powerful Wicca and Magical Jewelry; Train to be a witch; Wiccan Supply Store: Shop for five wares of the Craft and take 10 percent off your first order; Wiccan Spells: Spell Casting, Spell Kits, Voodoo, Amulets & Charms, and lots more; Wicca & Wiccan Spells: Get Love, Money, Health, Power and More With Powerful Wiccan Magick (sic); Witches’ Voice: The Witches’ Voice offers the latest (updated daily) in news and networking for the modern witch, Wiccan and pagan community.

God’s word expressly prohibits the practice of witchcraft. "And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof; and I will destroy the counsel thereof: and they shall seek to the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizards. And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord: and a fierce king shall rule over them, said the Lord, the Lord of hosts." (Isaiah 19:3,4)

Bradford, chief judge of the Marion Superior Court, has the right idea. If his ruling is struck down on appeal, which is likely to happen, he should appoint a guardian to determine the boy’s mental and emotional state. Pulling his mind in so many directions can’t be good for him.

5 Comments:

At 9:28 AM, Blogger LynneMilesMorillo said...

It's too bad, Mr. Patterson, that you don't recognize in this judge's blatantly unconstitutional ruling the threat to your *own* freedom of religious practice. That is to say, unless you are interested in a state-sponsored religion (singular), which you'd better hope is your own.

Furthermore, the fact that it makes sense to most Indy christians is completely irrelevant. Does it make sense to the boy & his parents??? Does it make sense to people of non-christian (and no) faith?

Be careful! This is a dangerous slope you're leading down, which may end curtailments of your own freedom.

 
At 9:28 AM, Blogger LynneMilesMorillo said...

It's too bad, Mr. Patterson, that you don't recognize in this judge's blatantly unconstitutional ruling the threat to your *own* freedom of religious practice. That is to say, unless you are interested in a state-sponsored religion (singular), which you'd better hope is your own.

Furthermore, the fact that it makes sense to most Indy christians is completely irrelevant. Does it make sense to the boy & his parents??? Does it make sense to people of non-christian (and no) faith?

Be careful! This is a dangerous slope you're leading down, which may end curtailments of your own freedom.

 
At 9:29 AM, Blogger LynneMilesMorillo said...

It's too bad, Mr. Patterson, that you don't recognize in this judge's blatantly unconstitutional ruling the threat to your *own* freedom of religious practice. That is to say, unless you are interested in a state-sponsored religion (singular), which you'd better hope is your own.

Furthermore, the fact that it makes sense to most Indy christians is completely irrelevant. Does it make sense to the boy & his parents??? Does it make sense to people of non-christian (and no) faith?

Be careful! This is a dangerous slope you're leading down, which may end curtailments of your own freedom.

 
At 9:58 AM, Blogger Gloriousone said...

Thank God for enlarging your territory and continuing to use your voice, much like John's, as one crying out in the wilderness.

The liberty that Christians possess is not predicated on the mindsets and wisdom of man. It is a much higher call and standard. Therefore, it is not tossed to and fro and compromised by popular opinion.

Witchcraft is an abomination to God and as his representatives, that is what we are charged to speak. An ambassador speaks the message of the Leader, no more, no less.

Continue to be led by Christ. In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will direct your path.

Rather than abide by the caution to "be careful", I say to you, "remain prayerful."

 
At 3:14 PM, Blogger ~*~ said...

What is shameful here, my friend, is that you would make such presumptions on such a lack of knowledge. First, the child and parents are Unitarians. Please research this faith. It is a faith founded on the premise that all religions have deep value. Unitarian church services and religious education classes frequently will teach similarities and differences of Christianity, Judaism, Earth-based spirituality, Hinduism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, etc., side by side, so that the educated individual can see, compare and make his own divinely sanctioned right to choose a reality. As a Unitarian Universalist, it is not only acceptable to teach Wicca at home and send a child to a Catholic school, it would be blessed and encouraged! The foundation of Unitarian Universalism is religious tolerance and pluralism! Yet, you make your comments based on little more than a 2-second google search?? On such small knowledge you would toss aside our constitutional rights?

Among other things, (and on a somewhat unrelated note), regardless of much propaganda, "Wiccans" acknowledge that their faith is relatively modern and that its "ancient" beginnings are really the continued adherence to older pantheons and holidays. What you see today as a modern Wiccan did not EXIST during Biblical times; therefore, the biblical condemnation of "Witchcraft" is purely defunct. You are comparing apples and oranges. This is no different than singing Christmas carols in middle-english that refer to "burning the bundled faggot" (i.e. a tied up group of twigs) and then trying to apply this to the modern definition by saying that homosexuals should be burned, even though the two terms of "faggot" had entirely different meanings.

*sigh* If you understand nothing else, understand that without our first amendment protections we would be little better than nations where people of your OWN faith are destroyed. We all need the first amendment.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home