OK, I had this opening all planned, and then I realized that it was pointless. So.
One of the reasons I mostly dislike Christians - with few exceptions - is their total, invincible religious bigotry. "You're not Christian... So you don't believe in God?" (Or, "so you believe in the devil?")
No, I just don't agree with YOU.
But the thing is, I hate religious bigotry - or any bigotry, really - in any form, no matter who's practicing it.
In this case, it's a court, practicing it against a Christian, and that's just as wrong as you guys telling me I have to be a Satanist because I don't believe in the divinity of Jesus.
There's a ten-year-old girl in New Hampshire that would like to talk to the Founders, to make sure they REALLY MEANT IT about religious freedom.
She is a Christian.
She is fervent in her belief.
Frankly, I personally do not agree with the parents' decision to so brainwash her with religion that she is unable - at TEN - to even consider the validity of alternate viewpoints. I find that closing a child's mind like that is a disgusting and morally repugnant practice.
But I also understand two crucial points that the court in New Hampshire seems to have missed.
First, it is an element (of COURSE) of the faith that allowing her to believe - or even THINK about - anything other than the Jeebus is dooming her soul to hell, and an eternity of torment.
My response to the parents in this case would be - good for you, believing in a God so bloodthirsty that he would condemn a ten-year-old to eternal punishment for considering alternatives. You have a right to do it, and no-one has a right to tell you NOT to, but that's a disgusting belief system and I am overfuckingjoyed I don't share it.
Second, is the fact that this child is in fact passing all her standards; academically, she is apparently excelling, and her social interactions are perfectly normal.
Other, you know, than the fact that she is all about Jeebus.
Yes, I'm mocking you. Tough.
At any rate, if she was doing poorly academically, or socially, then there might be a basis for some action; but instead, that's not the case, and yet the social worker in charge of the homeschooling program decided that Jeebus is inherently bad for children - or something - and convinced a judge to vastly, immensely overstep the bounds of their authority and order Amanda to attend public school, so as to experience "alternative viewpoints."
You have no right to do that.
That's not hard; there is no authority whatsoever for a court to order a child out of a NON-abusive situation.
...But wait...
Do you see what they're trying to do here?
They're trying to, in a sneaky, backdoor sort of way, convince us that Christianity is INHERENTLY child abuse.
Dude, I don't agree with you guys on a LOT of things - mostly, the fact that very, very few of you even seem to ATTEMPT to live up to your ideals, instead paying them lip service and then moving on with your daily life - but I don't think your brand of religion is inherently child abuse.
If I were you guys, I would be PISSED.
Actually, I AM pissed - because if they can do it to you, they can do it to me, especially considering my viewpoint is decidedly a minority compared to yours.
The principle of religious freedom was so important to the Founding FATHERS (fuck the history-rewriting clowns on the left. There were no female Constitutional signatories,) that they encoded it into law FIRST.
It was the FIRST FUCKING THING THEY DID.
YOU don't have a right to tell me what I can and cannot believe, and vice versa. The state CERTAINLY has no business whatsoever doing so.
What's that scent?
That papery, dry, but slightly sharp smell?
...Would that be an angry letter-writing campaign?
I believe it is.
