A Stitch in Haste

First they came for the gays, then they came for…

An Indianapolis father is appealing a Marion County judge’s unusual order that prohibits him and his ex-wife from exposing their child to “non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals.” The parents practice Wicca, a contemporary pagan religion that emphasizes a balance in nature and reverence for the earth.

Cale J. Bradford, chief judge of the Marion Superior Court, kept the unusual provision in the couple’s divorce decree last year over their fierce objections, court records show. The order does not define a mainstream religion.

Bradford refused to remove the provision after the 9-year-old boy’s outraged parents, Thomas E. Jones Jr. and his ex-wife, Tammie U. Bristol, protested last fall.
…
The ICLU and Jones assert the judge’s order tramples on the parents’ constitutional right to expose their son to a religion of their choice. Both say the court failed to explain how exposing the boy to Wicca’s beliefs and practices would harm him.
…
“When they read the order to me, I said, ‘You’ve got to be kidding,’” said Alisa G. Cohen, an Indianapolis attorney representing Jones. “Didn’t the judge get the memo that it’s not up to him what constitutes a valid religion?”

Some hasty stitches:

–This is not a “parent v. parent” dispute. Both parents are Wiccans and neither asked the judge to intervene. He did so “sua sponte,” or on his own. Gee, activist judge?

–The supposed basis for this order was that the child attends a Catholic school and the two faith systems are so conflicting that it might harm the child. So I guess Jews, Protestants and Hindus who send their kids to parochial school might want to steer clear of judges now too. I can be forgiving of judges who order parents to learn English, or not to smoke, or to take anti-psychotic medication, but this obviously doesn’t rise to the level of any foreseeable detriment to the child. This is anti-pagan bias, pure and simple.

–If parents can be told not to expose their children to “non-mainstream religious beliefs,” then can orders regarding “non-religious beliefs” be far behind?

–By the same token, if a judge can intervene of his own accord where “non-mainstream religious beliefs” are at stake, then what about “non-mainstream lifestyles.” That’s a domain with which gay parents are all too familiar.

–It’s one thing to call for impeachment of judges whose opinions you disagree with, but at what point is a judge’s conduct so outrageous that it must not only be reversed on appeal, but should also trigger an investigation of the judge’s underlying competence? (Remember Roy Moore?) Whatever that standard is, this fool judge has certainly met it and surpassed it.

Other thoughts at Dispatches. Hat tip to How Appealing.

Similar Posts:

• Anti-Atheist Discrimination in Child Vaccination Laws
• A Wiccan Win!
• No First Amendment in Europe — U.K. School Bans “Purity Rings”
• California Court: No Right to Homeschool
• Judging Kerry’s Judging of Judges

Filed under: Uncategorized