lol
this judge apparently has never heard of atheists.
fairness
like he'd deny someone the right to NOT believe in a supreme being.
Home > Content > General > Document: Parents demed unfit to take care of a child because of lack of religion.
Parents demed unfit to take care of a child because of lack of religion.
5 Comments - 1513 Views
Submitted By Ellman on 09/08/23
FreeHovind, Ellman, General
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,877155,00.html?iid=digg_share
This is so insane i can't really believe it...
"Inestimable Privilege. In an extraordinary decision, Judge Camarata denied the Burkes' right to the child because of their lack of belief in a Supreme Being. Despite the Burkes' "high moral and ethical standards," he said, the New Jersey state constitution declares that "no person shall be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshiping Almighty God in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience." Despite Eleanor Katherine's tender years, he continued, "the child should have the freedom to worship as she sees fit, and not be influenced by prospective parents who do not believe in a Supreme Being." "
This is so insane i can't really believe it...
"Inestimable Privilege. In an extraordinary decision, Judge Camarata denied the Burkes' right to the child because of their lack of belief in a Supreme Being. Despite the Burkes' "high moral and ethical standards," he said, the New Jersey state constitution declares that "no person shall be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshiping Almighty God in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience." Despite Eleanor Katherine's tender years, he continued, "the child should have the freedom to worship as she sees fit, and not be influenced by prospective parents who do not believe in a Supreme Being." "
» Reply to CommentRe: Parents demed unfit to take care of a child because of lack of religion.
thebiblewascompiledin325AD
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/08/23 - 21:22 GMT
» Reply to CommentRe: Parents demed unfit to take care of a child because of lack of religion.
like he'd deny someone the right to NOT believe in a supreme being.
Exactly. If the parents had been religious, I highly doubt that the judge would have have denied their adoption app on the grounds that the child would be denied his/her right to NOT worship a supreme being as he/she saw fit.
» Reply to CommentUtter hypocrisy
The last sentence quoted from the judge is one of the most ridiculous bits of self-contradiction I've encountered in recent memory:
"the child should have the freedom to worship as she sees fit, and not
be influenced by prospective parents who do not believe in a Supreme
Being."
And how many children of religious parents have the "freedom to worship as [he/she] sees fit"? Unless the judge is referring to the "freedom" to be indoctrinated in the religious beliefs of their parents.
If anything, a child is MORE likely to have that freedom with non-religious parents.
» Reply to CommentRe: Utter hypocrisy
They probaly see it as christianity is the real religion and that there are many groups of christians so the child can worship what ever any christian group thinks. Like calvinism, lutheran or catholic etc. Still sucks ass.
» Reply to CommentRe: Utter hypocrisy
They probaly see it as christianity is the real religion and that there
are many groups of christians so the child can worship what ever any
christian group thinks. Like calvinism, lutheran or catholic etc.
Most likely, which is the main reason why I think the judge's justification for his decision is completely hypocritical. How many Baptists would allow their children to attend Catholic mass "if he/she saw fit"?
Anecdotally, a friend recently got married and her mother (a Catholic) almost didn't attend because her daughter had begun attending a United Church and had the wedding ceremony there (performed by a female minister).
None of this site's content is copyrighted, unless it specifically says otherwise.
