I order you to be PC
WND:
A Colorado mother is appealing a child custody decision in which a court barred her from teaching homosexuality is wrong.
Cheryl Clark, who says she is a Christian, has been ordered by Denver County Circuit Judge John W. Coughlin to “make sure that there is nothing in the religious upbringing or teaching that the minor child is exposed to that can be considered homophobic.”
If true, this is abysmal. Sure, she could be teaching her child to be homophobic but you can’t discount religious beliefs.
October 31st, 2003 at 9:15 am
Are you thinking this doesn’t pass the smell test? I have heard a lot of bizare crap but a court preventing you from teaching hate to your own children?
Wait, sounds bad when you say it that way. Can she teach the kids to love the sinner but hate the sin?
I’m all confused, up is down, black is white.
Help me here! OK I give up
UNCLE!!!!!
[grin]
October 31st, 2003 at 10:01 am
you’re assuming she’s teaching hatred (which she may or may not be teaching). there is a rationale for some christians to disapprove of homosexuality (i.e., it’s in the bible).
If she wants to teach her children that homosexuality is wrong, that’s not something a judge can put a stop to. Sure, it’s ignorant but you can’t discount religious beliefs.
October 31st, 2003 at 11:09 am
Tough call here, because if you read the story, there’s this not-so-minor detail:
What the court is essentially saying is that you can’t teach your child that the OTHER person with whom you share custody is evil. Divorce the religious aspect from the equation for a moment, and it seems like a not-at-all-unreasonable decision.
Religion muddies the issue, but religion always muddies every issue it touches.
October 31st, 2003 at 11:18 am
Yea this is one area where the libertarian in me trumps the conservative. Parents, even those who make bad decisions about raising their children, have the ultimate responsibility in deciding what’s appropriate for them (assuming they are not being physically hurt).
I used to know a lady who told her children that Aids was invented by rich, white, republicans to do away with minorities. She wholeheartedly believed it to. In my opinion that was installing hate for white republicans in her children. How is that any different then what this mother MAY be teaching her children? I say, “may” because we don’t really know for sure.
I come from a perspective where I do believe that it is a sin but I also acknowledge some people are born that way. It is not my job to judge them in the hereafter nor will I judge them now.
The love the sinner hate the sin really does apply to many Christians as it does me. Besides the Bible is full of condemnation for many sins. I am not sure why this particular one seems to get all the attention of the “haters.” Do they equally hate those who commit adultery or fornication? I doubt it.
Personally I am appalled by the amount of “good” parents who let their young children play/see extremely violent and or sexual movies and video games. However, that is only my opinion and I don’t believe my opinions are more important then their rights as a parent. I don’t like it but I have to live and deal with it in this free society.
All I can do is try to teach and protect my own children the best I can and then hope for the best.
October 31st, 2003 at 11:32 am
*somwhat off-topic warning*
Buck:
Besides the Bible is full of condemnation for many sins. I am not sure why this particular one seems to get all the attention of the “haters.” Do they equally hate those who commit adultery or fornication? I doubt it.
Never mind those sins. Why not go with the sins from the same section of the Bible, that get equal attention in the Bible, like eating shellfish, and sex during menstruation?
The truth is that virtually all modern religious adherents, at least in America, ascribe to “cafeteria” religion. They pick and choose the parts of their religion that they agree with, and simply disregard the others. Hence the prevalent anti-homosexual attitudes in people who eat at Red Lobster without even flinching.
October 31st, 2003 at 12:13 pm
Well I am a New Testament Christian so I am not sure what you said applies to me but I get your point.
For us the Old Testament is for study. The laws you mention that are contained within it were specifically for the Israelites and was never meant to apply to anyone out site of them. I also don’t think “pick and choose” applies to New Testament Christians because we also believe that the Bible is what dictates which laws we are under today.
Again I do get your point and I partially agree with ya.
October 31st, 2003 at 2:51 pm
Buck:
First, I wasn’t trying to accuse you personally of anything, so I’m sorry if I came across that way. I was making a more general point about people who use their religious beliefs to “judge” others.
Secondly, I understand New Covenant vs. Old Covenant, but when Christians condemn homosexuality, they rarely appeal to the New Testament, even though it is spoken against there at least once. That is why I appealed to the Old Testament admonitions.
Thirdly, even within the context of the New Testament, there’s still a lot of picking and choosing going on. Don’t see too many self-proclaimed practicing Christians selling everything they own and giving the proceeds to the poor, do we? (Matthew 19:21, Mark 10:21, Luke 12:33) We see many Christians trying to open every event (football games, council meetings, etc.) with a prayer, and trying to reinstate public prayer in places like schools, despite Jesus’ own disdain for such behavior (see Matt 6:5-8).
Truth to tell, most modern Christians concern themselves far more with the teachings of Paul than with the teachings of Jesus (which is, admittedly, in part because there are a lot more of them). But sometimes, they do contradict one another.
October 31st, 2003 at 3:34 pm
First of all. Amen. Secondly I didn’t take anything you said personal. I was just trying to give you some idea of where I was coming from.
Thanks for the clarifaction and I am sure we will meet again in another post.
October 31st, 2003 at 4:47 pm
Sorry ’bout the threadjack. I’m sure we’ll meet again in other posts, also.