K_Z
Verified Anesthetist
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2010
- Messages
- 6,657
- Reaction score
- 2,497
JMO but I doubt the children have been forbidden to pray.
The parents praying with the children could sometimes be a tool for more emotional abuse, guilt tripping the kids for asking for help and reporting abuse or simply for enjoying their new friends and learning things at the school, trying to skirt around the forbidden topics to pressure the kids to a point of view or saying certain things, or otherwise sabotaging what the foster care people are trying to achieve.
"... please forgive our son who was tempted to lie by the devil who says I abuse him when I disciplined him for his own good... please deliver him from sin, he's saying he likes the new ungodly school... please save him from the evils of [insert list of religious insults directed at people who are trying to help]...
BBM. I think you are 100% correct in this assessment, Donjeta. Prayer used as a cover for inducing guilt feelings in the children for what they are putting the other children, parents, and community through, psychological manipulation, emotional blaming for the current situation, etc. That's why it's not allowed during the visits. The children are almost certainly free to pray alone or with their siblings.
This case, as margomom so eloquently writes, is not about homeschooling, Christianity, or religious persecution. It's about the children's safety and freedom from abuse, both psychological and physical. The children were not removed because they are homeschooling Christians, despite what they may say in interviews and on blog posts. Homeschooling and Christianity won't hold up in court as an objective set of reasons to remove children. There has to be credible evidence of abuse, neglect, and/ or serious safety hazards, no matter what religion is practiced, or whether the kids are schooled at home or elsewhere.
I have to notice that HS hasn't made any direct comments publicly lately about his beliefs about discipline techniques. He just talks about his rights to bring up his children being infringed upon, his rights to pray with them being restricted, his conversation with them during visits to be monitored and restricted, etc. Granted, he's under a gag order, but even so, these kind of interview comments don't exactly put him in a flattering light with the general population, IMO. But then, his comments (and his wife's) were chosen to appeal to his community of religious sympathizers and supporters, not the general population.