There are a lot of things horribly wrong with this, but let’s start with this one. The father had to agree to religious training of his children to be allowed to see them. (It’s at 0:58.) What part of this ruling is not favoring religion? This is absolutely unconscionable!
Let’s also note the implication from the statement that when the man was a Christian, communication was easier for the two. Anybody want to take a bet on who cut off the lines of communication? I wonder if this case is anything like the one I posted about last week.
How many more cases of this do we have to see before we just admit the obvious? Religious beliefs tear families apart.
The guy had a protective order against him by the wife. That is why he lost custody. Not over religion. Read the court ruling and the police reports. Note that he didn’t say he would appeal which is his right. No he’s going to picket instead, because he knows he is lying about the case and doesn’t stand a chance on appeal.
Posted by Protektor | December 26, 2010, 2:57 am