Family Court orders Dad not to take child to catholic church

[Luissa]

Gee, it must be great to to so perfect that you have never made a mistake. And that you are more concerned with some form of punishment for the father that you're happy to see his kids suffer - because when you stop access between parent and child, it is the child who suffers most. Contrary to popular female belief, are not the property of a mother. They are people in their own right.

It is when I read posts like yours that I understand why lefties see abortion as acceptable. They don't care about the child after its born, so no wonder it's a struggle to care before it is.

I find it fascinating how many Americans are not in the slightest bit interested in the rights of others.

You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.

Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.

Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.

It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.

This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.

Immie

They decided to raise the child jewish, the child was going to a jewish daycare, the father knew the mother didn't want the child being raised catholic. He then had the child baptized, I don't think the mother is playing games at all. She is protecting her child from an idiot, who is putting himself before the child. Notice how the mom was not interviewed?

 

[Ravi]

Gee, it must be great to to so perfect that you have never made a mistake. And that you are more concerned with some form of punishment for the father that you're happy to see his kids suffer - because when you stop access between parent and child, it is the child who suffers most. Contrary to popular female belief, are not the property of a mother. They are people in their own right.

It is when I read posts like yours that I understand why lefties see abortion as acceptable. They don't care about the child after its born, so no wonder it's a struggle to care before it is.

I find it fascinating how many Americans are not in the slightest bit interested in the rights of others.

You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.

Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.

Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.

It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.

This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.

Immie

She might be, but how do you get that idea from this story? The mother is raising the child according to her religious customs, the customs the father agreed to when he converted to Judiasm.

 

[Ravi]

It also seems to me that the judge is biased and probably should have recused himself from the case.

Immie

Jews can't be impartial?

Would you say the same thing if the father was a Christian Scientist?

How about a Mormon?

Muslim?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

People bitching over who gets to brainwash the kid: the satanists or the original race cult....


Both parents should be executed for using the child to get back at their spouse.


Put the child in a good home and let the child decide later what idols to worship

 

[WillowTree]

Some day Dad might up and disappear along with his child. And some stupid somebody is gonna ask "why?"

 

[California Girl]

So you would alright with someone taking your child to a church you don't approve of?

Since when has a father been classified as 'someone'. It's his child too. Mothers do not have ownership of children - custody is not ownership. Kids ain't cars.

If you have full custody that means you are providing the majority of the care, and should have the last say in how the child is raised.

It's a child, not a fucking car. Unless there is a seriously good reason, both parents should be equally responsible - nothing to do with the law - to do with the best interest of the child.

 

[Ravi]

Some day Dad might up and disappear along with his child. And some stupid somebody is gonna ask "why?"

If that is the case the answer to "why?" would be because he's a criminal.

 

[Charles Stucker]

From what little evidence we are given the father took the child to church and had her baptized before she was old enough to make the choice herself. However, the Catholic faith believes that a children must be baptized or they can not enter heaven because of original sin.

One thing to understand is that the judge issued a temporary 30 day restraining order, perhaps while he sought expert advice on a tricky situation. 30 Days is a remarkably short period of time. The father sounds as if he deliberately is trying to provoke a response, though at this point we do not have all the facts. We do know his faith was weak enough that he DID, by his own admission, refute his beliefs to try and 'keep his marriage' which lends credence to the conclusion that his belief is not as central to his identity as he now professes. Worse, he can be legitimately seen as using the little girl as a pawn against his former wife. That is the sort of behavior, using children for personal gain, which we, as a society, should discourage.

 

[California Girl]

Some day Dad might up and disappear along with his child. And some stupid somebody is gonna ask "why?"

If that is the case the answer to "why?" would be because he's a criminal.

No, that would be the outcome, not the reason. If the father were to disappear with the kid, it would be because two fucking grown ups are not capable of putting the welfare of a child above their own shit. BOTH parents, not one. Kids are not possessions - and Mothers often see them as such.

 

[Immanuel]

You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.

Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.

Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.

It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.

This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.

Immie

They decided to raise the child jewish, the child was going to a jewish daycare, the father knew the mother didn't want the child being raised catholic. He then had the child baptized, I don't think the mother is playing games at all. She is protecting her child from an idiot, who is putting himself before the child. Notice how the mom was not interviewed?

My children went to a Jewish Daycare as well but I didn't raise them Jewish.

Dad agreed to raise the child(ren) Jewish... true. Mom vowed "until death do they part". It doesn't seem that either one of them fulfilled their vows.

I agree, Dad's doing this to hurt mom. Not a good thing and I am very glad I never had to go through such an ordeal with my wife.

You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.

Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.

Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.

It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.

This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.

Immie

She might be, but how do you get that idea from this story? The mother is raising the child according to her religious customs, the customs the father agreed to when he converted to Judiasm.

Mom would not speak to the reporters. Most likely because it is evident in what she says and how she says it. Come on, why else would she attempt to stop him from just taking her to church? She's doing it to hurt him... maybe with good reason, maybe not.

My brother (raised Lutheran) married a Catholic as well. He agreed to raise their children as Catholics although his wife was not devout and they never attended church regularly.

Personally, I see no problem with mom raising the little girl under her religious faith. She has that right. I do see a problem though with not allowing him to at least expose her to his faith. It breeds intolerance.

However, dad is going about this wrong. He does not appear to be doing it because of his faith. He appears to be doing it to rub her nose in it.

Immie

 

[Luissa]

Since when has a father been classified as 'someone'. It's his child too. Mothers do not have ownership of children - custody is not ownership. Kids ain't cars.

If you have full custody that means you are providing the majority of the care, and should have the last say in how the child is raised.

It's a child, not a fucking car. Unless there is a seriously good reason, both parents should be equally responsible - nothing to do with the law - to do with the best interest of the child.

That would work great, in fantasy land!
And the father agreed to raise the child as jewish, not the mother's fault he went back on his word.

 

[Immanuel]

It also seems to me that the judge is biased and probably should have recused himself from the case.

Immie

Jews can't be impartial?

Would you say the same thing if the father was a Christian Scientist?

How about a Mormon?

Muslim?

Jewish people are as impartial as the rest of us.

Yes, I would say the same about a Christian Scientist, a Mormon or even a Lutheran.

In this case, it appears that the judge is not being impartial. A judge should recuse himself any time there is the slightest possibility of a conflict of interest. This case being a religious dispute between his faith and another faith leaves the potential of a conflict.

You recuse yourself from a case if there is a potential conflict of interest not afterwards. That is why I was so upset about the Halliburton no bid contracts granted by the Bush Admin. There was the appearance of a conflict there. The Admin should have had others review the entire matter and make the recommendations to give the contracts to Halliburton even if these contracts were not issued as paybacks.

Immie

 

[Ravi]

However, the Catholic faith believes that a children must be baptized or they can not enter heaven because of original sin.

This is no longer true. Catholics did away with this "rule" and if this guy was devout at all he'd know it. Just one more example of him being a phony.

 

[Ravi]

Some day Dad might up and disappear along with his child. And some stupid somebody is gonna ask "why?"

If that is the case the answer to "why?" would be because he's a criminal.

No, that would be the outcome, not the reason. If the father were to disappear with the kid, it would be because two fucking grown ups are not capable of putting the welfare of a child above their own shit. BOTH parents, not one. Kids are not possessions - and Mothers often see them as such.

Why are you so quick to take his side?

Here is what we know:

The woman is Jewish.
The man converted, tacitly agreeing to raise any children as Jews.
They divorced.
The man is breaking his original agreement on which religion to raise the child in.

No where in the story is the mother asked to present her side of the story and yet you are demonizing her.

 

[Ravi]

Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.

Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.

It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.

This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.

Immie

They decided to raise the child jewish, the child was going to a jewish daycare, the father knew the mother didn't want the child being raised catholic. He then had the child baptized, I don't think the mother is playing games at all. She is protecting her child from an idiot, who is putting himself before the child. Notice how the mom was not interviewed?

My children went to a Jewish Daycare as well but I didn't raise them Jewish.

Dad agreed to raise the child(ren) Jewish... true. Mom vowed "until death do they part". It doesn't seem that either one of them fulfilled their vows.

I agree, Dad's doing this to hurt mom. Not a good thing and I am very glad I never had to go through such an ordeal with my wife.

Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.

Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.

It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.

This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.

Immie

She might be, but how do you get that idea from this story? The mother is raising the child according to her religious customs, the customs the father agreed to when he converted to Judiasm.

Mom would not speak to the reporters. Most likely because it is evident in what she says and how she says it. Come on, why else would she attempt to stop him from just taking her to church? She's doing it to hurt him... maybe with good reason, maybe not.

My brother (raised Lutheran) married a Catholic as well. He agreed to raise their children as Catholics although his wife was not devout and they never attended church regularly.

Personally, I see no problem with mom raising the little girl under her religious faith. She has that right. I do see a problem though with not allowing him to at least expose her to his faith. It breeds intolerance.

However, dad is going about this wrong. He does not appear to be doing it because of his faith. He appears to be doing it to rub her nose in it.

Immie

I don't think Jews promise "until death do us part" so in reality the only vow broken was his to raise the child as a Jew.

It's disturbing to see you and a few others projecting your own prejudices onto this woman. We have no idea what she thinks aside from the fact that she is trying to raise her child in her religion.

 

[Ravi]

It also seems to me that the judge is biased and probably should have recused himself from the case.

Immie

Jews can't be impartial?

Would you say the same thing if the father was a Christian Scientist?

How about a Mormon?

Muslim?

Jewish people are as impartial as the rest of us.

Yes, I would say the same about a Christian Scientist, a Mormon or even a Lutheran.

In this case, it appears that the judge is not being impartial. A judge should recuse himself any time there is the slightest possibility of a conflict of interest. This case being a religious dispute between his faith and another faith leaves the potential of a conflict.

You recuse yourself from a case if there is a potential conflict of interest not afterwards. That is why I was so upset about the Halliburton no bid contracts granted by the Bush Admin. There was the appearance of a conflict there. The Admin should have had others review the entire matter and make the recommendations to give the contracts to Halliburton even if these contracts were not issued as paybacks.

Immie

Then in your opinion only an Islamic, Buddhist or atheist judge could be impartial.

But not a Christian or a Jew.

 

[manifold]

She has custody and is raising the child according to her religious views.
He sneaks the child off and has her baptised a Catholic.

And he still practiced Catholicism after he converted to Judiasm.

What a phony.

I have no sympathy for him. He shouldn't go to jail but he should loose some visitation rights.

I imagine you'd all be singing a different tune if he snuck her off and enrolled her in an Islamic religion.

So you'd punish the child and not allow her to see her dad.

Nice.

 

[Ravi]

Not what I said.

 

[RodISHI]

Sounds like a judge that needs a new job off the bench and as bad as a judge who would give one parent no visitation rights whatsoever because the parent was not of the same religious cult as he was. In most states these judges do come up for re-election every two or four years.

So you would alright with someone taking your child to a church you don't approve of?

You say "someone" where in the case of the OP it is the child's dad. As far as my own children go I let my children make their own choices as to whom they wished to go to church that is if they even wanted to go to church.

I have personally talked to a man whose wife used their children as a tool. A magistrate took away all of his parental rights merely because the judge did not like the church that the guy belong to. It was not the church the judge went to and the judge made a comment to state this as he made his ruling. One parent was Mormon and the other was Catholic. IMO, the judge violated the rights of the child and the father because of his personal prejudices. The community at large being members of all different beliefs and faiths voted the creep off the bench. Even a members of the magistrate's own church were disgusted when they learned what had truly been happening in this guy's courtroom. Prior to the information getting out to the public the magistrate's church group had stood behind him and bashed anyone that disagreed that this guy even belonged on the bench making rulings that could affect people's lives so drastically.

 

[Immanuel]

If that is the case the answer to "why?" would be because he's a criminal.

No, that would be the outcome, not the reason. If the father were to disappear with the kid, it would be because two fucking grown ups are not capable of putting the welfare of a child above their own shit. BOTH parents, not one. Kids are not possessions - and Mothers often see them as such.

Why are you so quick to take his side?

Here is what we know:

The woman is Jewish.
The man converted, tacitly agreeing to raise any children as Jews.
They divorced.
The man is breaking his original agreement on which religion to raise the child in.

No where in the story is the mother asked to present her side of the story and yet you are demonizing her.

I know this was not directed at me but here are my answers.

Why are you so quick to take his side?

Because, I am a man... if I were the judge, I might have to recuse myself.

The woman is Jewish.

Stipulated.

The man converted, tacitly agreeing to raise any children as Jews.

You have no idea what we men will do for a piece of ass, do you.

They divorced.

Sadly this is true.

The man is breaking his original agreement on which religion to raise the child in.

Agreed.

No where in the story is the mother asked to present her side of the story and yet you are demonizing her.

I believe the story said that she was asked to present her side of the story and she declined.

I'm not demonizing her any more than I am demonizing him. I believe that they are both using the child to hurt the other. That is wrong in my humble opinion, but I believe that it happens in way too many cases of divorce.

Immie