There recently have been two situations that have caused me to think about the concept of freedom of religion. I want to know what you think.
A few weeks ago, in our area, a 15-month old girl died from untreated pneumonia because her parents belong to a church that practices faith-healing alone, choosing not to seek medical care when ill. This girl is far from the first child of a member of this particular church who has died from an easily treatable medical condition. These parents are now being charged with manslaughter.
Yesterday, law enforcement officials removed at least 137 children from the ranch belonging to followers of Warren Jeffs, the leader of the Fundamentalist Church of the LDS. These children who were removed are believed to be in danger of physical, emotional or sexual abuse. The FLDS church practices arranged marriages, often between girls as young as 12 or 13 to men far older than they are. This church also regularly practices polygamy, and many of these girls are married into families where they might be the 3rd or even 4th wife. Warren Jeffs is now serving a minimum 10-year prison sentence, having been convicted of two counts of accomplice to rape for marrying underage girls to adult men. Just to clarify, the FLDS church is no longer affiliated with the LDS church, and most Mormons DO NOT endorse these practices.
Obviously, we know child abuse certainly isn't limited to those who belong to extremist religions, but that is the context of my question today.
In the most technical sense, freedom of religion does not protect behaviors or activities that are otherwise criminal. However, is there more we should be doing to protect children who are harmed by religious extremists, right here in the United States? Should we, as followers of Christ, be more aggressive in some way towards ending these kinds of practices? Should we be more angry about children who are abused or endangered in the name of God?
I don't specifically know what we CAN do about it, I'm just asking for your thoughts on this subject.
Anyone?
A few weeks ago, in our area, a 15-month old girl died from untreated pneumonia because her parents belong to a church that practices faith-healing alone, choosing not to seek medical care when ill. This girl is far from the first child of a member of this particular church who has died from an easily treatable medical condition. These parents are now being charged with manslaughter.
Yesterday, law enforcement officials removed at least 137 children from the ranch belonging to followers of Warren Jeffs, the leader of the Fundamentalist Church of the LDS. These children who were removed are believed to be in danger of physical, emotional or sexual abuse. The FLDS church practices arranged marriages, often between girls as young as 12 or 13 to men far older than they are. This church also regularly practices polygamy, and many of these girls are married into families where they might be the 3rd or even 4th wife. Warren Jeffs is now serving a minimum 10-year prison sentence, having been convicted of two counts of accomplice to rape for marrying underage girls to adult men. Just to clarify, the FLDS church is no longer affiliated with the LDS church, and most Mormons DO NOT endorse these practices.
Obviously, we know child abuse certainly isn't limited to those who belong to extremist religions, but that is the context of my question today.
In the most technical sense, freedom of religion does not protect behaviors or activities that are otherwise criminal. However, is there more we should be doing to protect children who are harmed by religious extremists, right here in the United States? Should we, as followers of Christ, be more aggressive in some way towards ending these kinds of practices? Should we be more angry about children who are abused or endangered in the name of God?
I don't specifically know what we CAN do about it, I'm just asking for your thoughts on this subject.
Anyone?
Erin,
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of examples like the ones you cite, of course I want the state to protect children from such treatment. On the other hand, when Richard Dawkins calls religious education of children "child abuse," I'm bound to disagree. I guess the question is where do you draw the line. The extremes are the easy cases ...
Erin ~ Statistically, these groups represent the smallest portion of "abusers". Child abuse is not limited to age, race, sex or religion. Unfortunately, what happens is that because it is a religious group, the media has a field day with it and pretty much paints a very "broad" stroke.
ReplyDeleteMy take is that anytime any child is abused, this is an affront to God and as a society in whole, (especially followers of Christ)we should all be on the front lines of defending our children against this; whether it be in the churches or in the homes.
I think that's what I'm getting at, Maria. These examples are obvious, but then where DO we draw the line? Do we make faith healing illegal when practiced on children?
ReplyDeleteMike - Well I know that...I guess what I'm wondering is if it's the religious community that ought to take more responsibility for these kinds of offenses, more than we do? I get the feeling some Christians do sort of "look the other way" towards this kind of thing, especially the faith healing.
ReplyDeleteHi Erin,
ReplyDeleteGreat topic. Your question is should we as Believers do more to help and be more angry regarding these things that are done in the name of "freedom of religion".
In the case of the parents who allowed their child to die, I have to wonder if they are ignorant or if they never stopped to consider that the answer to their prayers was waiting for them in the form of medical treatment. I think they were negligent and wrong. I don't know what more anyone could have done for them since they would not listen to people who suggested they get medical help. I heard the tape of the 911 call and it was chilling. I think the mother realized in her anguish that she was responsible for her daughter's death and she seemed shocked that God did not answer her prayers the way she thought He should have. I can't think of a punishment more harsh than that.
As far as the cult of sexual perverts hiding behind the name of religion, they should all be thrown in jail, the men and the women who allowed children to be used and abused. This has nothing to do with religious freedom, its illegal and wrong.
What can we do? I have no clue. April is Sexual Abuse Awareness month - maybe we need to start a Religion Abuse Awaremess month?
Erin, I don't know what more can be done without starting to violate human rights. Where do you draw the line? People are going to do bad things, even "religious" people; it's happened in every single society since the year dot and to think that we can fix that by punishment or coercion or whatever just continues the way the Church has oftentimes dealt with it in the past and ends up with fearful societies rather like the ones we've got now.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what the answer is. Maybe there isn't any answer. :( Or maybe we don't like the answer that means allowing God to change our hearts. Maybe that's all any of us can do. Maybe it comes down to the bottom line of each of us acting in love in the situations we find ourselves in instead of thinking the government or the pastor or whatever will take care of it. Maybe it means befriending the losers and the freaks. I don't know. *wrings hands*
How wild do you want this discussion to get?
ReplyDeleteTalking historically, we can get into some really interesting discussions.
While these situations are sad and sickening, the only place we can draw the line is where the law is already established. It is a very dangerous thing to civil liberties to begin saying "someone should do something about this!" I want to say that but then, like the example was already given, Dawkins could demand that someone come in require us to not abuse our children by teaching them the Christian-Judeo faith.
ReplyDeleteI hate it. I hate how beliefs can make monsters of us all. We (collectively) think out way is the best way while someone else looks on and screams, "How could you DO this?!"
:sigh:
Barbara - I agree that the pain of losing a child must be about as bad as it can possibly get. Only one problem I see with not prosecuting them: they will continue this practice, putting their other children (if any) in danger. If they see their daughters death as "God's will", they won't change the practice unless given good reason to do so.
ReplyDeleteA religious/spiritual abuse awareness month...now that's an idea...
Sue - Well, anything that is normally illegal is still illegal even when done under freedom of religion. So it's not about passing more/new laws about religious practices (drawing new lines), it's about enforcing the laws more thoroughly when these kinds of things are perpetrated in the name of religion, and educating people about them. I think that might be what I'm getting at...like the issue in the church with gender equality, making sure people are aware and to ask them to stop "looking the other way" about these kinds of things.
ReplyDeleteI'm wringing my hands, too.
Nate - Bring it on.
ReplyDeleteMichelle - I agree that we are OK where the lines are already drawn. These things are already illegal, I'm not necessarily saying we need new laws.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm just looking (as I said in another comment) for more awareness and action and less tolerance. Kinda like: Let's OUT theses suckers! Because, like the church where the little girl died, this is an ongoing problem...she's far from the first. There are many children in that church who are at risk. Is there something law enforcement can do about allowing people to choose not to seek reasonable medical care for their children? Because it seems to me that there is a lot of "looking the other way" that goes on because they are doing it in the name of religion.
If I am just an everyday parent who claims no religious affiliation, and who chooses not to seek medical care for a severely diabetic child, I'm guilty of child abuse. But if I claim a religious reason for doing so, well...it's OK on some levels.
I'm really thankful law enforcement invaded that FLDS ranch, and hopefully those children will be protected from now on.
Erin --
ReplyDeleteI hear ya. It's quite a problem for sure. And it's become quite a shame how people hide behind "religious beliefs" for something. I didn't immunize my babies; just didn't feel right about it. Now that they're older, one has finished, the other two have started theirs. But babies? Nope - didn't do it. Someone suggested that I claim "religious beliefs" as a way out of it. I just told the pediatrician "NOPE". They could get over it or refuse to be the doctor. I was lucky, he actually got over it.
I've digressed so far I've forgotten my point.... dang it. ;-)
These situations are very sad considering the most helpless are the ones that are negatively affected by the irrational beliefs.
Very disappointing, really. The parents probably think they're doing the right thing. Again, site Jim Jones. I just don't get it.
Michelle
Michelle - I don't get it either. Maybe they are at a point where they are convinced it's the way things ought to be, but as a mother, I can't understand it.
ReplyDeleteerin- i agree with supporting law enforcement to do whatever it can- as well as encouraging the passing of the strongest laws possible to prevent child abuse regardless of the circumstances. Religious individuals could certainly join forces with groups that work to spread the word about gross injustices, though, like the many Christians who speak out about sex slavery these days. I think that public awareness makes a difference in how much effort law enforcement puts into investigating some sensitive situations. As a Church, though i don't see what could/should be done.
ReplyDeleteErin -
ReplyDeleteDefinitely. I'm not sure there is a limit to what I'll chunk out the window of beliefs in order to protect my children.
That's probably not very devout to say but ... well, I'm not devout these days anyway. :-)
Michelle
I reread your post and yes, that was what you were getting at :)
ReplyDeleteThorry, I'm a bit thlow thometimeth.
This is a toughy.
ReplyDeleteAs one commenter said, the percentage of abuse happening under the banner of religion is probably small. But abuse is abuse and snuffing it out is important no matter where it occurs.
Education is the key?
That sounds pat, and I have no clue how to bring about a situation in our nation where people raise their kids in a way that isn't abusive or neglectful.
But defining those terms gets tricky.
My head hurts . . .
If only we could put a licencing system in place before people are allowed to have children!
ReplyDeleteHonestly, child abuse is such a huge problem, but what can we do other than try to cope with the fallout? Any abuse in the name of religion is absolutely evil - I wish it could all be done away with. But again, it's not possible to regulate it. I know a woman who took her son off his epilepsy medication, believing it was a demon causing it, and since she'd cast out the demon he must be healed. A few months later (after casting out demons several times) she put him back on the medication. Yes it's abuse. But with all the sexual abuse and physical abuse the authorities have their hands full. And unfortunately it's not illegal to take your own child off medication that is prescribed by doctors without a court order. They take months to get.
All we can really do is warn, and cope with the fallout. I think one of the biggest jobs out their for Christendom in general has to do with fallout. :-(
Cindy - I guess I think maybe we ought to make some noise about it...but I don't know.
ReplyDeleteMichelle - Maybe not being devout is a good thing? ;-)
ReplyDeleteSue - Yeth, you are. Hehe.
ReplyDeleteBrian - Definitely tricky. It just seems to me this is one place where real abuse is sometimes overlooked...because of the "religious" covering. It's just so hard to accept.
ReplyDeleteHeather - To quote Tod (Keanu Reeves) in the 1989 film Parenthood:
ReplyDelete"You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they'll let [anyone] be a father."
I think this issue is something I have just now begun to think about, so maybe it really is just awareness that can begin to make a difference.
I don't know. Sticky, for sure.
I agree about the licensing thing. Look at what we had to go through to get ours!
ReplyDeleteWith that in mind, I wonder how many people would have children if they had to be fingerprinted and have their backgrounds and criminal history checked. I wonder how they'd feel if they had to put out about 15K before the process could even start.
Makes for some interesting thought. I could go a lot farther with this but I'll leave it there.
Interesting point, Mike. I hadn't even thought of it from that perspective. Wow. Yeah.
ReplyDelete(Which incidentally is why we haven't initiated the foster-to-adopt process yet...will we hold up under intense scrutiny? Not that I have anything specific in mind, but what if we don't? That's a discussion for another time, too.)
But honestly I don't think some mandatory eduction before parenthood would necessarily be a bad thing.
I disagree that any mandatory classes should be required for parenting. The more we put our hope in legislation the worse things will get. Personal responsibility and community responsibility is where we should focus. I'm assuming, Mike, that you went through an adoption process. Legislation involved in that with the process and especially the money is absolutely ridiculous, as I'm sure you know more about that than I do.
ReplyDeleteHaving a legislator tell us that we must do "this" or "that" before we can exercise our liberties is never a good thing. Yes, fallout and bad things will happen but the same incidents will go on regardless of more legislature.
Michelle
Michelle - You are right, and I know. We can't legislate everything and expect everyone to be happy and safe. This just bothers me so much and I wish there was some easy solution, but there's not.
ReplyDeleteIt's been an interesting and informative conversation, though. And to know those who share my grief is helpful to me.
I'm with ya.
ReplyDeleteIt's a very difficult topic and I wish I knew the best way to handle it.
Our generation moves farther and farther away from living in community; real community. We turn the other way when our in-laws or close friends are behaving oddly. We take it as "not our business". Thus when things get out of hand, we have no other outlet but to cry out to the gov't officials, "Do something!"
We don't want to meddle but we don't want to be apathetic either.
I do mean "we" collectively, of course. But I've had the same questions arise within my own family - do I say something or do I not?
Maybe the question should be how could we begin to nurture relationships that are deep enough to handle the "whoa..I think you're wrong here" moments?
Michelle ~ We did go through the adoption process. I'm a little biased toward "good parenting" since I see the opposite so often. I am convinced that there are certain people who should not reproduce; yet they have kids to the tune of about 1 every year and a half to two years. It's just crazy.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there should be less legislation for pretty much everything. I believe that our government created such a need for them that existence without them would seem impossible. Everybody wants the government to fix their problems when in reality, most people's problems can be fixed by themselves.
Again, in my line of work, I am used to this: If you have a problem with your neighbor, you call the police. What ever happened to actually knowing your neighbors. I am glad we live in a neighborhood where everybody knows everybody and we all get along. It is a pretty awesome community.
Michelle and Mike - This is such a hard topic, because when we are dealing with these beautiful little people, all we want is to protect them...but if we legislate that, what's the cost?
ReplyDeleteDo we take the freedom of parenting away? Of course not. Do we try to better educate the parents? Maybe. Do we try to at least better inform the public about how to tell when something is wrong and what to do or who to report it to? I don't know. Maybe.
I don't know here, but the dialog has been helpful to me and really got me thinking. Because my first inclination is to say we need to better regulate parenting...
But the truth is although I'm a good mom, if someone asked my kids if I ever yelled at them, they would laugh and say "When does she not yell?" Does that make me an unfit parent?
But some people would say it definitely makes me an unfit parent...so where do we draw the lines?
Anyhow...
I've enjoyed this dialog as well.
ReplyDeleteI think that knowing your neighbors, as Mike pointed out, and your thoughts of public awareness is the best route to take. We really have no other recourse without calling in for big-brother.
It's definitely an issue that should have more of our attention and less of our apathy. (speaking to myself here)
Michelle
Michelle - No, I agree with you about less apathy...that sums up my feelings well. Thanks!
ReplyDelete