Wicca Power!
Andrew Cory
I don’t climb onto the Pagan-wagon too often, so I hope you’ll excuse my doing it just this once. If it helps, please understand that I don’t care much for Wiccans, finding them much too Green for my own comfort level. Nonetheless, I do understand that from where your typical holder of “mainstream religious beliefs” wouldn’t be able to see much of a difference from where they are sitting. Fair enough. Anyway, onward:
An Indianapolis father is appealing a Marion County judge's unusual order that prohibits him and his ex-wife from exposing their child to "non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals."
The parents practice Wicca, a contemporary pagan religion that emphasizes a balance in nature and reverence for the earth.
...
"There is a discrepancy between Ms. Jones and Mr. Jones' lifestyle and the belief system adhered to by the parochial school. . . . Ms. Jones and Mr. Jones display little insight into the confusion these divergent belief systems will have upon (the boy) as he ages," the bureau said in its report.
What’s truly upsetting here is that the judge ruled without being asked by anyone, and did so because he felt the child’s psyche might be damaged by being exposed to both Christianity (at school) and Wicca (at both his parents’ houses)...
I can’t even begin to express my outrage at this. It is rulings such as this which begins to make people nervous about impending theocracy. I fully expect this ruling to be overturned (or at least explained much better, in ways which having nothing to do with the religion per se), but there simply is a large part of the population which will see nothing wrong with this ruling as it stands. And, yes, that is terrifying...
The question is: in a nation where around 75-80% of the citizens claim a belief in some form of Christianity is it even possible that something else might be granted status as “mainstream”? What about the Mormons, are they “mainstream”? Episcopalians? Perhaps this ruling could be used to keep children out of the clutches of Jehovah’s Witnesses...
The thing to understand is that the American (and Western) legal and political tradition places strong boundaries along church/state lines specifically so we can avoid the sorts of bloody sectarian wars over the “proper” way to worship the deities of our choice that caused so much destruction during the 17th and 18th centuries. Our system is deliberately apathetic on this issue specifically so that the apparatus of government won’t be a prize to be fought over and ripped to shreds...
When this judge creates new legal categories of “mainstream” and “non-mainstream” religious views, and states that the two cannot be safely co-taught to the same child, and states that only the “mainstream” can be taught, a rather large prize is created...
I am not saying that this is leading down a slippery slope to hellish theocracy. I am saying that this is about the worst, most un-American ruling the judge could have possibly made. I have every faith that it will be overturned on appeal...
(via A Stitch in Haste)
(Update: Fixed link)
In this case, the request was made by the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau. I have seen judges give great deference to these interest groups, who are supposed to look out for the interests of the children separate from either parent. This can be very important when both parents are misusing the children in their personal war. But I would be interested to know what harm the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau saw. I suspect the zealotry is in their office, not the judge's chambers.
The closest equivalent behavior I have seen was when a friend and his ex-wife went to court to adjust his child support payments. His son had recently moved out to live with him instead of his ex-wife; and so he and the ex-wife had a rare bit of agreement that his child support payments should be reduced, since she was only caring for one child. Then the Friend of the Court (Michigan's equivalent to the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau) stepped in, and persuaded the judge to increase the child support payments.
These groups serve an important purpose. Somebody has to look out for the kids. But sometimes, they can be staffed by the worst sort of busybodies.
This is a rare bit of common sense in the judging from first glance. But I haven't read the decision ... I have, however, read many divorce decrees and they can be incredibly invasive. You don't want a nasty divorce ... the court has unusual latitude in telling you what you can and can't do and then can enforce it through the power of the court. You're better off making peace with your ex-wife or ex-husband.
On top of that, there are probably many more examples of this kind of behavior that aren't told. That concerns me even more.
This is insane, stupid, and dangerous.
Insane because it doesn't correspond to reality. What, we're supposed to remove all SF books that denigrate Chrisitianity (which is most of them) because it was confusing to me as a child?
Stupid because indeed people do teach multiple doctrines.
Dangerous because while I wouldn't say our gov't is apathetic, it is clearly founded on Christian principles, but two of those principles are freedom of the soul, and free speech. This would lead the way to religious war.
I don't think many Christians want this. Thats because Christians are pretty much the most tolerant people in history. No, this is Child Protection bueraucrats.
Lets reign in the CPS and their like.
This should be a no-brainier to get overturned. If that doesn’t happen, then we’ve REALLY got problems.
I also have a little bit of insight into this issue. One set of my grandparents were devout Mennonites. White bonnets, blue dresses for the ladies, dark cloths and hats for the men, completely blacked out cars, the whole nine yards.
The other set were hard core Jehova’s witnesses. Again, the whole nine yards.
So I was exposed to some wildly differing thoughts as a child. I don’t think it hurt me a bit (although some friends might beg to differ). Of course it didn’t make sense when I was 6 or 7 years old, but I would argue that not much makes sense then anyway.
But through my teen years, as I learned to think on my own, I started to understand the various beliefs of each side of the family. I ended up with a healthy respect for all religious beliefs, and even find the acceptance of NO religious beliefs entirely reasonable. It also instilled in me the importance of keeping such matters completely out of the governments hands.
But this ruling from the judge is nuts, and is even worse if it was a rubber-stamping of a child services bureaucrat's opinion.
I've long believed that much of what child services departments do is un-Constitutional (specifically, that it violates the Due Process clause). But I never would have believed that they would be this blatant about it.
This ruling shouldn't just be overturned; the judge and the child services caseworker should both be censured (preferably fired, in the case of the caseworker).
The link's not dead; it's just poorly formatted, and I forgot to point that out to Andrew. It should read like this.
And I may have overstated when I said that the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau requested this action. Here's the full quote:
So it's possible that the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau pointed out the Wiccan beliefs, but did not recommend this action. I withdraw my criticism of them. At this point, it's indeterminate where this action originated; but since the judge ordered it, we know he has responsibility for it. We don't know whether the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau shares any of that responsibility or not.
What? I don't see anywhere where it is said that most Americans support the ruling. Heck, the vast majority of discussion I've seen anywhere is expressing disgust at this decision - from both the left and the right no less.
This is, indeed, a bizarre ruling. It would be strange even given other reasoning, but "confusion" is not something the law can or should protect you from.
"Guns gun AK-47 Smith &Wesson Colt. gun rifle. Luger, .45 .38 special"
If enough of us wrote that, we'd have gun ads showing up!
An essential part of this freedom is the right of parents to raise their children as they see fit. And if they wish to expose their children to ideas that conflict with those taught and practiced in the home, that is their right also. It won't confuse the child, it will give him more food for thought.
I'm very glad to see Christians here standing up for the rights of these parents. And I'm not surprised. Most Christians in America undertand the value of religious freedom for others as well as for themselves, knowing full well that the next case could be some atheist judge forbidding their children to read the Bible or to pray, as, alas, is already happening in too many of our public schools. I'm against that. Freedom means freedom for all, or it ends up as freedom for none.
I myself am a Pagan in the old sense, a Polytheist, but I've concluded, especially during my month-long hiatus from the blogosphere, during which I was re-reading the writings of G. K. Chesterton, that the opposite of Paganism in the historic sense is not Christianity or Judaism but secularism. Indeed, those whose spiritual ancestors were the deepest Pagans 1000 years ago, adhering to the Gods of their fathers, are today the deepest Christians, adhering to the God of their fathers. I admire and support that.
No, Christianity was not invented in the 1970s.
And, above all, that the underlying dreams of most of these supposedly advanced creatures of this world are rooted in envy, sloth, gluttony, wrath, pride, lust, and greed.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
If you are a true Pagan, as you say and as I assume you are, then should you not say:
"Gods bless America"
???
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Not as heavy-handed as the Colorado judge that gave a former lesbian lover of a child's mother the right to control what the child was told about proper family relationships on the grounds that the lesbian lover had been in the vicinity when the child was adopted.
God bless America, and all Gods and Goddesses bless America. My Polytheism includes the G-d of the Jews (the Children of Israel) and the Holy Trinity of historic (Athanasian) Christianity. Or, possibly, it is the other way around, i.e., that, as C. S. Lewis and G. K. Chesterton have argued, Christianity, particularly Catholic Christianity, has conserved within it much of the best of the ancient Polytheism. Interesting about it all.... I have decided to use the form "God" (as in "one nation under God") as shorthand for the entire Godhead, for the same reason that I use A.D. or Anno Domini. Conversely, as I write this, today is Frigga's Day now going into Saturn's Day.
Paganism has existed for a very long time but the version that is being practiced today has existed in some form since the early 20th century. If you are interested in the history of Paganism I would recommend the recent book by Leo Ruickbie.
The idea that the modern "Wicca" religion is the same as -- or even very similar to -- European paganism of antiquity is pretty funny, as Jerry Kindall and others also noted. For a glimpse of what paganism in antiquity was really like, around the time when Christianity and Roman/European paganism were locked in their final battles for supremacy -- hint: like Christianity, it was, in essence, monotheistic, much like modern Hinduism is essentially monotheistic -- check out this piece (after the introduction, a chapter from the Cambridge Medieval History) called "Monotheistic Paganism -- or, Just what was it Christianity fought and faced?"