Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Religion
 Parent denied custody
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 12/01/2010 :  18:42:53  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message  Reply with Quote
... because he is agnostic.

http://www.alternet.org/belief/149037/shocking%3A_agnostic_dad_loses_custody_of_kids/?page=1

I detect a lawsuit if the claims in this piece are accurate. There is a video of the interview on the second page of the article.


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth

On fire for Christ
SFN Regular

Saudi Arabia
1266 Posts

Posted - 12/01/2010 :  19:20:56   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send On fire for Christ a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Maybe they thought someone who suddenly changes his religion after 30 something years might be slightly unstable. I mean when you're at the stage in your life that you're having custody lawsuits, you really should have it set in your mind whether there's a God or not, and what, if any, your purpose on this planet is. Maybe people should figure that stuff out before deciding to bring children into the world.

Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13463 Posts

Posted - 12/01/2010 :  19:22:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dude

... because he is agnostic.

http://www.alternet.org/belief/149037/shocking%3A_agnostic_dad_loses_custody_of_kids/?page=1

I detect a lawsuit if the claims in this piece are accurate. There is a video of the interview on the second page of the article.


Yeah. Saw that. I don't see how a ruling like that one can hold up. He should probably contact the ACLU.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13463 Posts

Posted - 12/01/2010 :  19:38:37   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by On fire for Christ

Maybe they thought someone who suddenly changes his religion after 30 something years might be slightly unstable. I mean when you're at the stage in your life that you're having custody lawsuits, you really should have it set in your mind whether there's a God or not, and what, if any, your purpose on this planet is. Maybe people should figure that stuff out before deciding to bring children into the world.
Firstly, it may not have been so sudden. I mean, his change of view may have happened over the whole four year period, or even longer than that.

Also, you think there is an age limit on changing your mind about God? You know, from my point of view as an agnostic/atheist, that decision seems to be an indication of increased stability, in that he had the courage to finally let go of the myths of religion or whatever was bothering him about it. But that's just conjecture on my part. For the life of me, though, I can't see how changing his religious views, unless he started playing with snakes or bombs or one of those whacked out things you get from some religious sects, says anything from a legal or psychological standpoint about his stability.

Also, my ex-wife is a believer and I'm what I am. We had full joint custody and that was that. Our son is doing just fine.

It's just nonsense that his change of religious views should have a bearing on whether he shares joint custody.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

moakley
SFN Regular

USA
1884 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2010 :  10:55:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send moakley a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by On fire for Christ

Maybe they thought someone who suddenly changes his religion after 30 something years might be slightly unstable. I mean when you're at the stage in your life that you're having custody lawsuits, you really should have it set in your mind whether there's a God or not, and what, if any, your purpose on this planet is.
Personally, I see a willingness to change ones mind, due to the recognition/understanding of better data or the revelation of bad data or no data, as a strength of character. I don't believe we have a purpose on this planet, but consider myself damn lucky to have had the opportunity. As far as "God or not", I choose not since it strikes me as delusion upon delusion to derive meaning from faith in the supernatural based on the recorded stories of mostly anonymous human authors.

Maybe people should figure that stuff out before deciding to bring children into the world.
Are you suggesting a religious litmus test for having children?

Life is good

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous
Go to Top of Page

Robb
SFN Regular

USA
1223 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2010 :  11:50:08   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Robb a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Here is a copy of the order:

http://static.cnhi.zope.net/heraldbulletin/flashpromo/docs/1120scarberry.pdf

I think people may be misrepresenting the descision that it was soley based on his religious views.

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13463 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2010 :  12:16:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Robb

Here is a copy of the order:

http://static.cnhi.zope.net/heraldbulletin/flashpromo/docs/1120scarberry.pdf

I think people may be misrepresenting the descision that it was soley based on his religious views.
Did you look at number 8 Robb? Evidence that the mother left the kids alone and didn't buckle them in there car seats and didn't feed them breakfast? 10 and 12 were about the fathers religion. 13 says the father used profanity in front of the kids and has anger management problems. He also probably sent angry text messages to the mother. (If the father actually hit the kids or the mother, I'm sure that would have been mentioned.)

So here's how it adds up as far as I can see. The mother actually endangered her minor children by leaving them alone, not buckling them in to their car seats, and what's with the not giving them breakfast? All of which there is evidence for according to the order. (The father was the petitioner. Do you think it might have had something to do with the mother actually endangering her kids?)

The dad used bad words, was angry with the mother, and of course, wasn't a Christian anymore. That's mentioned twice.

So the judge concludes that the mother, who actually endangered her kids according to the evidence, should get full custody and the dad gets four hours a week. Doesn't something here jump out at you Robb?


Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

On fire for Christ
SFN Regular

Saudi Arabia
1266 Posts

Posted - 12/03/2010 :  18:02:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send On fire for Christ a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Also, you think there is an age limit on changing your mind about God? You know, from my point of view as an agnostic/atheist, that decision seems to be an indication of increased stability,


Maybe in the long-term, but in short to mid-term hanging your entire outlook on the purpose and meaning of existence is not going to increase stability, it's about as much personal turmoil as you can go through.
I wonder if he got a young girlfriend and a sports car too?

Go to Top of Page

Robb
SFN Regular

USA
1223 Posts

Posted - 12/03/2010 :  18:54:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Robb a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Kil

Originally posted by Robb

Here is a copy of the order:

http://static.cnhi.zope.net/heraldbulletin/flashpromo/docs/1120scarberry.pdf

I think people may be misrepresenting the descision that it was soley based on his religious views.
Did you look at number 8 Robb? Evidence that the mother left the kids alone and didn't buckle them in there car seats and didn't feed them breakfast? 10 and 12 were about the fathers religion. 13 says the father used profanity in front of the kids and has anger management problems. He also probably sent angry text messages to the mother. (If the father actually hit the kids or the mother, I'm sure that would have been mentioned.)

So here's how it adds up as far as I can see. The mother actually endangered her minor children by leaving them alone, not buckling them in to their car seats, and what's with the not giving them breakfast? All of which there is evidence for according to the order. (The father was the petitioner. Do you think it might have had something to do with the mother actually endangering her kids?)

The dad used bad words, was angry with the mother, and of course, wasn't a Christian anymore. That's mentioned twice.

So the judge concludes that the mother, who actually endangered her kids according to the evidence, should get full custody and the dad gets four hours a week. Doesn't something here jump out at you Robb?


Did you miss the word Soley in my post? These things are nasty when kids are involved. I don't know the truth here but I have left my kids unbuckled, forgot to give them a meal and left my minor daughter at home alone for a short while. Should my kids be taken away from me? In a custody suite these incidents can look pretty bad.

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13463 Posts

Posted - 12/03/2010 :  19:05:18   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well Robb. That only leaves anger on the fathers part. And his religious views. And yet, no where does it say anyone was assaulted by him. Guess we will have to see what happens when he challenges the decision.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Robb
SFN Regular

USA
1223 Posts

Posted - 12/04/2010 :  20:07:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Robb a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Kil

Well Robb. That only leaves anger on the fathers part. And his religious views. And yet, no where does it say anyone was assaulted by him. Guess we will have to see what happens when he challenges the decision.
I agree that he should not be deied custody because of his religious beliefs unless they are detrimental to the child.

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9677 Posts

Posted - 12/11/2010 :  03:53:04   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Robb
I agree that he should not be deied custody because of his religious beliefs unless they are detrimental to the child.
Who decides what religious belifs are detrimental to the child? I'd argue that Christianity is, out of personal experience.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Robb
SFN Regular

USA
1223 Posts

Posted - 12/11/2010 :  21:07:07   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Robb a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

Originally posted by Robb
I agree that he should not be deied custody because of his religious beliefs unless they are detrimental to the child.
Who decides what religious belifs are detrimental to the child? I'd argue that Christianity is, out of personal experience.
OK, but you have no say in the matter.

There are already laws in each state that define what child abuse is. There is no state that I am aware of that considers teaching christianity to children abuse. If someone is doing something to children that meets the standard of child abuse in that state, then they should be prosecuted no matter what religion they are.

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9677 Posts

Posted - 12/12/2010 :  08:45:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Robb

Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

Originally posted by Robb
I agree that he should not be deied custody because of his religious beliefs unless they are detrimental to the child.
Who decides what religious belifs are detrimental to the child? I'd argue that Christianity is, out of personal experience.
OK, but you have no say in the matter.

Obviously not, for countless reasons. But neither do you.
However, we both have the right to express our opinions.


There are already laws in each state that define what child abuse is.
Whoa! Don't go overboard now. There's a difference between detrimental and abuse.

There is no state that I am aware of that considers teaching christianity to children abuse.
Maybe there should be.

What does the Bible say about stuff like baptism? The evangelical churches I went to all said baptism was meant to be done once you're old enough to really understand what it is all about. In my Pentecostal church, that was in your mid-teens. After your 18th birthday if you didn't have your parent's consent.

I don't mind Christian parents raising their children with what is commonly known as "Christian values", like loving your fellow humans (all of them, even goddamn atheists) care for each other, never lie, don't abuse substances, keep your temper, stand up for those who are weaker than you, etc.
My dad was atheist and mom was possibly, discretely, religious. But I was raised with those "Christian" values.
I believe those made me a good person.

What I absolutely don't get is how Christian parents hate atheists and teach their children to hate atheists. Or Muslims or gays for that matter. Or people who are Democrats, or from Canada. That's so fucked up.


If someone is doing something to children that meets the standard of child abuse in that state, then they should be prosecuted no matter what religion they are.
Amen to that.



(edited spelling)

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 12/12/2010 08:45:59
Go to Top of Page

On fire for Christ
SFN Regular

Saudi Arabia
1266 Posts

Posted - 12/12/2010 :  23:53:54   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send On fire for Christ a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Yeah if someone breaks a law they should be prosecuted. I feel like we're really getting somewhere!

Go to Top of Page

podcat
Skeptic Friend

435 Posts

Posted - 12/13/2010 :  21:44:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send podcat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Unless, of course, you're a Catholic priest accused of child abuse:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/11/wikileaks-vatican-pressur_n_795334.html

“In a modern...society, everybody has the absolute right to believe whatever they damn well please, but they don't have the same right to be taken seriously”.

-Barry Williams, co-founder, Australian Skeptics
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.25 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000