This is fucking child abuse...

[Paradoxical]

Today started out really well. I woke up early. Ate breakfast. And prepared for class. I was walking onto campus when I noticed a caravan of three mobile homes.

On the sides of these motorhomes were giant decals saying things like

"The end is near!"

"The world will end on May 21st!"

"The Bible says so and it is the truth!"

Now, as a college student in the 21st century, I have grown accustomed to such displays of insanity and ignorance. Almost every day, there is a preacher on campus telling passersby that they are going to hell because they masturbate.

But what I'm not use to is exactly what fucking happened about 30 minutes later when I, again, saw the caravan of motorhomes on the opposite end of campus. They were collecting up a large group of kids who were all wearing the same t-shirts with the same slogans and they were all carrying what appeared to be handouts or pamphlets of some kind.

What I've deduced from this situation is that they are driving to one side of campus, dropping off the kids and then picking them up on the other side of campus. And the kids walk through campus proselytizing college students and telling them the apocalypse is happening on May 21st.

THIS IS NOT FUCKING COOL AT ALL. Let the idiotic old people drive around and preach their nonsense all they want.

But when they bring kids into the situation, this is the time for intervention. These kids should be taken away and the moronic assholes that brought them to campus should be arrested for child abuse.


Bingo: Found the group

http://www.familyradio.com/index2.html

[GKirk]

1. Maybe child endangerment

depends on their ages

[Paradoxical]

2. They all appeared to be below the age of 10.

[GKirk]

6. Call Child Protective Services tomorrow

see if that is something they would investigate. Next time you see it happen report them.

[Paradoxical]

7. I could go right now. I think the motorhomes are still going around campus.

[GKirk]

18. At least get their license plate numbers.

No good parent would drop their under age 10 child at a park and leave them unattended.
It's no better (and probably worse) to drop them off at a college campus.

[Morning Dew]

3. Those kids won't have good spring break stories to tell, I guess.

Then again, after May 21st, who's gonna care.

Unrec.

[Drale]

4. Its a cult

and unfortunately there will always be people desperate enough or stupid enough to join. Look at the Tea Party for gods sakes. There will probably be a wave of mass suicides on the May 21st, its a sad fact but its happened time and time again throughout history.

[cleanhippie]

49. What the difference between a cult and a religion?

Is it the size of the congregation? How does one know the difference?

[KaoriMitsubishi]

57. Easy.

One is dumb, the other is dumber.

Seriously asking the difference almost assumes one is legit while the other is not. They are in fact the same. They have no legitimacy at all.

[cleanhippie]

68. Then you understood my point.

[HockeyMom]

5. "Repent" "The end is near NEAR"

Saw those signs on the streets of NYC growing up in the 50s. Nothing new. We used to just ignore and walk by them.

[onager]

46. In the South, we had Nahum's Chariots...

White cars painted with the slogan - "This car is a sign of the soon coming of Christ." Along with lots of Bible verses. The painting was professionally done. I remember thinking they were customized hot rods, until I got close enough to read the crap.

Being the South, we also had uncountable numbers of free-lance prophets, tent revivalists and other deranged nutjobs cluttering the sidewalks and roads. I grew up about 40 miles from Bob Jones University, and every spring their students would hit the streets and rant at passers-by. I think it was part of their curriculum.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

8. heaven forbid you ever have children and someone decides

YOU are nuts based on your ideas and takes your kids. are they a little loose upstairs? probably. but unless they are physically endangering the children you are dancing with a very dangerous criteria for removing children from a home.

sP

[Paradoxical]

11. You realize that child abuse does not always include physical abuse, right?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

13. correct...and you are suggesting religious teaching be included

in your abuse definition?

sP

[Paradoxical]

15. uhhh yes. Especially when they preach the apocalypse is a couple months away.

[WolverineDG]

20. So, you're all for the government deciding which religious teachings are "proper?"

Be very very careful what you ask for....


dg

[tammywammy]

22. +1 n/t

[Paradoxical]

23. I'm all for the government taking children away from the severely mentally ill.

And an atmosphere that promotes the belief that one's life on Earth will end or at least begin to end within 2 months.


That is dangerous speech. Especially for the very young and impressionable.

[WolverineDG]

26. Again, just because YOU don't like it

doesn't mean it's "child abuse" OR that the parents are "mentally ill."

:eyes:

dg

[Paradoxical]

28. This has nothing to do with me not liking it.

Like I said, I see this stupid shit all the time. What I don't think is right is exposing children to such utter bullshit.

You don't think this is going to fuck them up?

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

40. ah...so I see someone doesn't get the extension to hyperbole...

but that is typical for DU. let any old nutter say they should take away your children because they don't like what you believe...but if you suggest something reciprocal...DELETE (and FAST)...

figures...

sP

[PassingFair]

55. Telling a child that they are going to DIE in two months IS child abuse.

Yes, it DOES mean it's "child abuse".

And YES, the parents ARE mentally ill.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

59. there are whole sects of Christianity that do not believe

that they will DIE with the coming of their Armeggedon. Some believe they will be raptured before the event and some believe they will stay behind and fight to win.

So, no, they don't have to be telling the children they are going to die...and once again, an all-knowing DUer has determined that religious belief that they don't like equals mental illness. Figures...

sP

[PassingFair]

63. Members of DEATH CULTS suffer from mental illness.

To inflict it on their children is child abuse.

Once again, a know-nothing DUer determines that
religious beliefs are above criticism.

[WolverineDG]

65. Funny, I thought only us "know nothings" resorted to

"straw men" & "ad hominem" attacks. :eyes:

Death Cult? Really? Sounds more like you are adding in something you want to be there (death cult) just so you can rationalize your desire to outlaw it, jail the parents, & haul the kids off to foster care.

dg

[PassingFair]

66. Not all abuse is punishable with removal of the child.

Doesn't mean its not abuse.

And those May 21st people are in a death cult.

[JuniperLea]

36. Scaring the hell out of a kid is bad for them...

I call it abuse too. However, I'm betting there's no good end to that fight because of religion being protected.

[WolverineDG]

45. There's no good end to that fight because

once you let the government decide what is "proper religious doctrine" & what isn't, you'll lose control over what you teach your kids.

Go ahead & start advocating for the end to this "abuse." Just don't come crying to me when the tables turn & it's your beliefs that are deemed "abusive."

dg

[JuniperLea]

76. I call bullshit...

If that were the case, I could start a religion right now wherein women are circumcised and men are not allowed to be, and all are forced to eat at Olive Garden before Tuesday afternoon sacred services are held and we all sit around hitting the bong before we go out to massacre small animals to hang on our fences during our purity festival which includes forcing gay people to view hetero porn in order to "fix" them... and all kids under the age of 12 must be diddled by the head preacher.

You can't torture people and get away with it because it's your religion.

[WolverineDG]

79. torture? who said anything about torture?

:crazy:

Fine. Keep your head in the sand while demanding that everyone be forced to believe only what you deem "proper."

dg

[JuniperLea]

84. Fine, split hairs...

Child abuse is torture... duh... :crazy: yourself, genius.

[WolverineDG]

88. But kids participating in activities protected by the First Amendment is not

duh, back on topic..... :crazy: yourself.

dg

[JuniperLea]

91. Child abuse is not protected...

No amount of ancient texts and modern dogma is going to make people think that child abuse is okay.

I doubt you are getting that, so buh bye.

[WolverineDG]

98. But the activities described in the OP are not child abuse nt

[darkstar3]

100. Oh certainly.

It's not child abuse to drop a mass of children unsupervised onto a college campus.
It's not child abuse to pull children out of school to parade them around spreading propaganda (these buses are traveling the country, and the organization is based in TX IIRC).
It's not child abuse to tell these children that their future is unimportant, that they need not stay competitive with their peers.
It's not child abuse for parents to financially act as if the world will end on May 21st of this year, forsaking mortgage payments and wise credit decisions.

None of that is child abuse...at least, it's not as long as you have a good religious excuse.

ETA: Yes or no: Is it possible to abuse children without breaking the law?

[WolverineDG]

102. No, it's not

and you are using your opinions about schooling, & "wise credit decisions" & applying them to this situation just so you can call it "child abuse."

And, btw, thanks for the :spray: :rofl: because if parents making unwise credit decisions & forsaking mortgage payments is considered child abuse, then the vast majority of kids in the country would be in foster care.


dg

[darkstar3]

104. Way to go!

You avoided every point and dodged the question, thereby showing you have absolutely no leg to stand on.

And parents who throw away their futures financially ARE convicted every year of child abuse in this country in the form of neglect and endangerment. I haven't listed anything in my post above that wasn't used in past CPS cases as criteria for further investigation and action.

But CPS isn't the only entity that gets to define child abuse. I'll ask again: Yes or no: Is it possible to abuse children without breaking the law?

[WolverineDG]

108. I'm not the one ducking & weaving nt

[darkstar3]

109. Yet you continually refuse to answer even a simple question.

[cleanhippie]

51. Religious teaching, no.

Religious indoctrinations, yes.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

60. ah, another person who draws a fine line

and I supposed YOU get to determine the difference? Yeah, good luck when they come for your kids (assuming you reproduce) and you cry that you were just teaching them your lifestyle or religious preference but someone in the gov't labeled it 'indoctrination'...

what a sad bunch...

sP

[cleanhippie]

69. Perhaps instead of spewing your ignorance for all to see,

you took a few moments to see what the difference between the two are.

Or don't.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

73. ok, sherlock...

help me out here. define indoctrination. i know what it means...let's see what you think it means.

sP

[cleanhippie]

75. Here ya go.

http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-education-and-indoctrination/

"The difference between education and indoctrination is vast, but it is often subtle when the mind thinks of these two subjects. Education involves the seeking of facts, and learning about what is the truth, and what is not. Indoctrination is aimed at influencing people to believe in facts, without being able to back up these newfound facts with anything but opinion."


More links to other sites here.

http://www.google.com/search?q=difference+between+education+and+indoctrination&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a


On edit: This is a very important topic and I felt should have its own thread. I just opened up a new one, lets move the conversation there, ok?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

86. sorry...this is not a definition of indoctrination

and uses vague terms like 'truth' and 'opinion'. religious teaching also uses these terms. they hold certain truths that you may not.

I am stealing this definition :

transitive verb
1: to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments : teach
2: to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle

The problem is that indoctrination is a negative word to you. However, if you were to have children (and I have no way of knowing if you do/don't/will/won't, your teaching them your political views or environmental (sorry...went with the hippie in your name) can easily be viewed as indoctrination by your words and the ones I have stolen. What happens when someone doesn't like YOUR indoctrination?

sP

[cleanhippie]

89. It certainly is a definition that applies here.

We are talking about religious indoctrination, and its an apt and appropriate description.


And in case you really want to know, we are raising our child to be a freethinker. We are doing our best NOT to instill OUR beliefs into her, but instead, teach her how to question, be skeptical, think critically, and use reason and logic in order to form her OWN beliefs and values. She may choose to grow up and join the Westboro Baptist Church, for all I know, but she will do that (or whatever she chooses to do) because SHE chose it after thinking about it critically, not because I forced MY values and beliefs onto her as a child.

Hopefully you see the difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought

[cleanhippie]

50. You don't think that brainwashing kids is endangering them?

I do.

[GKirk]

93. Don't we all brain wash our kids?

You and I think we are doing it the right way, so do these parents.
Who do you want making that determination?

[darkstar3]

94. No.

[GKirk]

95. Really?

You don't want your children to grow up to be compassionate liberals?
If they wanted to join the Teaparty that would be ok with you?

[darkstar3]

96. My opinion doesn't enter into it.

What I want my child to become takes a backseat to responsible education. The first step in education is to leave your biases at the door. Facts come first.

[GKirk]

105. Facts:

2+2=4 is a fact
Labor unions are good; that is an opinion

If your opinion as a parent is that labor unions are good
any fact you teach your children will reflect that.

[darkstar3]

107. Wrong

"If your opinion as a parent is that labor unions are good
any fact you teach your children will reflect that."

That is just flat out wrong, for more than one reason. 2+2=4 is a fact that has no bearing on labor unions, and therefore cannot reflect any opinion on that matter. Furthermore, it is easily possible to separate bias from fact, even if the 24 hour news networks have done everything they can to blur the line.

[WiffenPoof]

9. This Is Why...

...I have always been against bringing children to protests. I know that many here see no problem with using kids when it supports the Dem positions...However, I simply do not think that children who are not yet at the "age of reason" should be holding signs that support or not support policies that they do not understand.

-PLA

[Quantess]

10. These kids will grow up to realize that they had really kooky parents, most likely.

Afrer May 21st comes and goes, uneventfully, a taste of reality is going to set in.

[struggle4progress]

97. +

[MikeH]

101. Let us certainly hope so, or let us hope that at least some of the kids come to realize that

These kids will grow up to realize that they had really kooky parents, most likely.

After May 21st comes and goes, uneventfully, a taste of reality is going to set in.

That would certainly be very wonderful if any of the kids do come to realize that.

Unfortunately most of their parents are very likely to be http://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Parents-Overcoming-Hurtful-Reclaiming/dp/0553284347">toxic parents, and will very likely use forceful and abusive methods, both physical and otherwise, to ensure and insist that the children forget that their parents were wrong. They will very likely smack their children if the children ever mention May 21 or ask any questions.

And it is often very difficult psychologically to challenge or question what one learned from one's parents at a very tender age through physical force or physical or other abuse.

I am certain that such parents would remind their children of the commandment to "honor your father and mother", and that is a sin against God to challenge, question, or in any way to disobey one's parents.

[gratuitous]

12. Come May 22, 2011 or October 22, 2011

The grown-ups will have a lot of explaining to do to the kids. I'm guessing the kids may not be quite so inclined to listen to their elders, and will have learned a very valuable lesson regarding skepticism and (unfortunately) more than a tad bit of cynicism. You can live on the ragged edge of eternity for only so long before reality brings you back into a more stable orbit. But it's a very exciting and intoxicating ride while it lasts. It ends. It always does.

[wickerwoman]

29. It's going to be a pain repainting the date over that gas tank too.

[abelenkpe]

14. definitely child abuse.

Knew a guy who was always waiting for the end days. When they didn't come as predicted he accepted the revised date easily. Moved his family from state to state or wherever his church told him they needed to go. Sad really.

[alfredo]

16. The Spanish GP is on the 22nd, can't they hold off a day or two?

[WolverineDG]

17. Yay! Let's let the government decide which religion is best!

:woohoo: :party: :woohoo:

Oh wait, there's this pesky thing called "The First Amendment."

Well, shit.

dg

[Paradoxical]

19. You can say things that are protected under the 1st that is also child abuse.

[WolverineDG]

24. Just because *you* don't like a particular religion's teaching

doesn't mean what they teach is "child abuse."

Why don't you go sit in on some child abuse court proceedings so you can see for yourself what real child abuse is.

dg

[Paradoxical]

27. I know what child abuse is. I came from an abusive household.

Where things happened that were far worse than this. That in no way alters my opinion of this situation.

[WolverineDG]

44. So what religious doctrines do you deem proper?

And how are you going to enforce the teaching of such?

dg

[ProdigalJunkMail]

61. you will never get an answer to this...

to do so on the part of the poster would force them to think about the issue rather than spout off about it...

sP

[WolverineDG]

82. Yeah I know nt

[G_j]

30. I've seen religious child abuse

or child abuse based on religious beliefs. It can be very real and devastating!

[Princess Serena]

58. Not healthy...

I know...It is not healthy or in anyway productive to brainwash such young and innocent children with such an extreme religious propaganda.

[Mojeoux]

41. "Like" or not "like," some Interpretations Of Religious Teaching can be Dangerous.

How come you are being so obtuse? Religious bombers took out the WTC. WTF?
Christian teachings can be almost just as crazy.
I knew a guy who said the bible says that black people should still be slaves.

The concept of the world ending is creepy, not illegal, but exposing kids to this idea that we're all going to be dead in 2 months, is abusive, still not illegal.

It's not about banning religions anyway, it's about using little kids.

Religious people sexually abuse kids all the time, and say it's OK with their teachings.
The OP is correct that these people should be investigated.

[WolverineDG]

43. What you are saying that you want

is for the government to start telling people what is "proper" religious doctrine & what isn't, based on what *you* agree with.

"Religious bombers" & "religious people who sexually abuse kids" are different kettles of fish from those who teach their kids "the end is near" & have them hand out pamphlets. And if *you* can't tell the difference, then I'm not the one being obtuse.

dg

[Mojeoux]

56. Religious Mass Suicides

are another crummy deal these kids could be in for. It's not like the "end of the world" crowd haven't done it before.

Actually, I read that the leader of this cult has predicted the end before.

It's better than Phelps/style of attention getting.

Anyway Govenment Shmuzerment, It's not illegal to be misogynist and racist, just anti-social and stupid.

[darkstar3]

47. The government already did.

Their choice was "none". I wrote more about that here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x257115

[cleanhippie]

52. Religious indoctrination is NOT a protected right.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

62. the fuck it isn't... n/t

[cleanhippie]

70. Why are you so angry? We are all just giving our opinions here.

Lighten up, francis.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

72. when people here try to decide what religious belief/teaching

is OK and which one is not you bet I get pissed. it is smug, condescending and violates one of the most treasured rights among people.

tell me to lighten up? how about you get serious about the thought process behind the sort of thinking that allows restricting peoples' religious freedoms.

sP

[cleanhippie]

74. Again, its opinion. No one is making policy here.

Yes, we can ALL choose the wrong words and make the wrong impression sometimes, but we are not writing law here, just voicing opinions. If you disagree, formulate your own argument and submit it for discussion.

For me, I think that indoctrinating a child into ANY belief system before that child reaches the age of reason is brainwashing and child-abuse. Doing so ALSO violates the religious FREEDOM of the CHILD.

[darkstar3]

85. The fuck it is.

That child is a citizen of the US and has the same freedom of religion as the parents. To force that child to adhere to one specific religion is to deny that child their first amendment rights. Court cases in this area have been problematic due to the concept of parental privilege, but the first amendment combined with section 1 of the 14th amendment makes it quite clear that anyone born here is a citizen, and all citizens have the right to freedom of religion, and there are no age restrictions on that right.

Of course, private citizens infringe upon each others rights all the time. The real question is, should the government be enlisted to actively protect the rights of a group that cannot protect themselves?

[WolverineDG]

64. ...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Seems to me that this particular section of the Constitution protects at least three parts of the activity described in the OP, & quite possibly a fourth, depending on how you interpret "the press."



dg

[cleanhippie]

71. Considering some recent rulings that limit what parents can and connot do

especially regarding medical care and religious beliefs, the line is now being drawn.

[WolverineDG]

80. ...

:eyes:

[cleanhippie]

77. Do you know the difference between relgious education and religious indoctrination?

Especially when talking about children?

[WolverineDG]

81. Wiggle all you want

the scenario in the OP is protected under the First Amendment. You can keep trying to throw in all kinds of criminal behavior that you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the children & their parents were engaged in conduct that is protected.

dg

[cleanhippie]

83. I guess you are right. We do allow parents to mentally abuse their children by brainwashing them.

Are you simply arguing that this behavior of mental abuse is legal, or do you also agree with the practice?


I have started a new discussion on this topic that deals simply with the behavior, not the legality. I would love to have your thoughts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x274120

[WolverineDG]

87. You call it "indoctrination" & "brainwashing" & "mental abuse"

because *YOU* don't like what parents who believe in God teach their children. And yet you would be the first one outraged when someone who doesn't like what you believe decides that you are "indoctrinating," "brainwashing," & "mentally abusing" your children by teaching them there is no God. Funny how what is or isn't "indoctrination" & "brainwashing" depends upon the subjective opinion of the observer.

If you can't see how letting the government decide which religious teachings are child abuse & which are not would work against you, then good luck to you. You are going to need it.

dg

[cleanhippie]

103. Allow me to try, again, to explain it to you.

Forcing a belief onto a child BEFORE that child has the ability to reason is brainwashing, regardless of the subject matter. Do you understand that?

[stockholmer]

21. I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world

Richard Dawkins

[lpbk2713]

25. Campus Security must have gone out for donuts.

So three M/H's dump a load of grade schoolers out and they wander
around the campus till they are done with what they came for?


This could have ended a whole lot worse if the people in the M/H's had other intentions.

[ejpoeta]

31. leaving small children unattended is not a good idea. my 12 year old is lucky

if i let her out of my sight! but the relgious stuff in and of itself is not abuse unless they are beating the kids or something.

[ladywnch]

32. HALLELUJAH!!!!!!! They're all gonna be raptured away!!!!!

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:




May 22nd......The crazies are gone!! The crazies are gone!!! The crazies are gone!!!!!!!!!

[HubertHeaver]

42. But, what if WE get raptured and they get left?

[ladywnch]

78. Number 1. you have to BELIEVE in the rapture to be raptured.

Number 2. As long as the RW Christian Conservative wingnuts aren't part of the rapture we'd still be better off.

Number 3. According to the above mentioned group, rapture is ONLY for the TRUE BELIEVERS.....the REAL CHRISTIANS....REAL AMERICANS, so I figure I 'm well safe.

[Puregonzo1188]

34. Oh my god I was just talking about Family Radio the other day!

Hadn't it heard for four or five years, but I used to listen to it for laughs. Someone asked me if I still did and said no and I mentioned that I thought they believed the world was ending in 2011...

Is Brother Herald still alive? Thought I heard his voice scanning the radio one day, but wasn't sure.

[mysuzuki2]

35. Personally, I look forward to the Rupture

I really hope they're right. Once they all get ruptured, we'll be well rid of these characters.

[skepticscott]

48. Not only that

but they leave their clothes behind, so we get to go through their pockets and look for loose change

:woohoo:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

37. OK, I'm religious, and I'd still call child protective services, especially

if the children should be in school. If the parents claim home schooling, find out if they're at grade level for their age.

[sarcasmo]

38. religious insanity land, the united states.

[Initech]

39. At least hell is where all the good music and beer is going.

[dimbear]

53. I have never figured a practical way to bet against these dates.

Not sure why. I would give good odds.

[jillan]

54. I have been seeing those trucks in Phoenix too. What's going to happen on May 22nd when everything

is the same?

[PassingFair]

67. They'll have to re-wrap the buses.

Same thing that ALWAYS happens.

A few true believers re-calculate and
move on to the next doomsday date, the
rest slink off and hopefully rethink their
thinking processes.

Of course, it CAN go horribly wrong:

[MikeH]

90. Family Radio -- an Orwellian name if there ever was one

Family Radio -- Radio that is good and wholesome for the entire family.

Yeah, Right.:crazy:

An Orwellian euphemism for the ministry of a bunch of mean-spirited, exclusivist fundamentalist kooks who consider that they have God's plan all figured out.

Typical hijacking of a wholesome sounding name by a group with nefarious purposes.

There is a Family Radio affiliate in the San Diego area, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KECR">KECR, which I occasionally tuned into in the 1970's and 1980's, when I was serious about Christianity and being a Christian. The station was popular with fundamentalist and evangelical Christians I knew at the time. Even when I was still a Christian I had trouble with the fundamentalist beliefs preached on Family Radio. I came to discover that I especially could not stand listening to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Camping">Harold_Camping and his monotone voice and his very judgmental and condemning messages.

I didn't think about it at the time, but I now realize that the name "Family Radio" is a lie. The implication is that the only thing that is wholesome for the entire family is extreme fundamentalist Christianity.

Actually one thing that might be to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Radio">Family Radio's slight credit is that they have not been involved in politics and political/social issues, or at least not directly, like other fundamentalist Christian organizations associated with the Religious Right.

[GKirk]

92. This thread took an unexpected turn...

...I thought what the parents were doing was possibly abusive because they were dropping off young children without any supervision. To fend for them selves as it were.

Others seem to think that the religion indoctrination the parents are giving is in and of itself abuse.

I don't think so.

[cleanhippie]

99. The mental abuse is due to indoctrinating the children into the parents religon

before the children have reached the age where they are able to reason. Its called brainwashing.

[jeepnstein]

106. That just figures.

We've not been able to afford a family vacation for the last few years and now that the money's there, Judgement Day. Don't get me wrong, I'm really excited about the Lords' return but I thought he was going to keep it a secret until it happened. I suppose since we've already paid for the trip we might as well just keep on living as we do and see what happens.

I'm thinking those folks need to spend more time studying and praying and less time hanging out in their campus campers.

Matthew 24:36-51

The Day and Hour Unknown
36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.

42 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. 43 But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.

45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

I'd also quote the part about the people who will make all sorts of claims about the Kingdom of Heaven and how the World will hate us but there's plenty of evidence of that around here most of the time.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

110. Question:If you are a Christian, did your minister tell you & your kids you are worthless?

Becaues of original sin and a couple of fruit-munching simpletons in a fairy tale?
That they are going to hell and must be saved by Jeebus?

To me that is child abuse. I refuse to believe that I or anybody else is worthy of eternal punishment, just because some ignorant bible-beating preacher says so.

To me, ALL CHRISTIANITY is child abuse because original sin and substitutionary atonement are the starting premises of Christianity.

You cannot be a Christian without first accepting original sin.

I hate the song "Amazing Grace". I am NOT a "wretch", and neither is anyone else.

[Odin2005]

111. That is sickening!

:puke: