Dad takes daughter to church, violates court order.

Dad Takes Daughter To Church, Violates Court Order

Says Half-Jewish Child Should Be Exposed To Christianity, Too

Joseph Reyes was doing Sunday what millions of parents do all across the country: taking his daughter to church.

But for this 35-year-old father walking through the door of Holy Name Cathedral -- so his daughter can hear the teachings of Jesus Christ -- it could land him in the slammer.

CBS 2's Mike Puccinelli reports.

"I have been ordered by a judge not to expose my daughter to anything non-Judaism,"

<snip>


But last month, a judge issued a temporary restraining order specifically barring Reyes from exposing his daughter to any religion other than Judaism.
It happened after Reyes had his daughter baptized without first consulting his estranged wife.

more at link:


http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Joseph.Reyes.daughter.2.1432557.html

I couldn't bring myself to post this in the 'crimes' in the news forum, because I am still at a loss for words that any court, family or not, could actually set an order 'restraining' a parent from bringing their child to, or 'exposing' their child to various religious beliefs.

I'm at a loss for words. Surely a court order such as this would not stand up in court.

Unfortunately this is what happens when we have to get the court's involved regarding our parenting. Sometimes.

Cubby I know nothing of the law, but what happened to Church/State?

This makes me think of when Nicole Kidman took her and Tom Cruise's kids to Mass. Look what happened.

My grandmom always says "A lil religion never hurt anybody".

Exactly, church/state. Isn't there a point when a family court judge is just gonna say, enough is enough, there are some things the two of you are going to have to work out yourselves.

Sheepishly, I admit I don't follow celebrities enough to know about Nicole and Tom taking their kids to mass....... was there a big to do about it?

Cubby said:

Exactly, church/state. Isn't there a point when a family court judge is just gonna say, enough is enough, there are some things the two of you are going to have to work out yourselves.

Sheepishly, I admit I don't follow celebrities enough to know about Nicole and Tom taking their kids to mass....... was there a big to do about it?

Click to expand...

Hmmm, I just reread and saw that Reyes had converted after the child was born. He said he was pressured to do so.

That doesn't count though. We say "We're Catholics. It's like the maffia. You never get out". My DD would have a field day with this case. She's forever reminding me that Judaism and Catholicism is one in the same. Thank goodness I exposed her to more than Sunday Mass, and that Catholic school education. This week she thinks she's going to become a Hindu. As if ya just snap your fingers.

Ohhhhhhhhhh, Cubby yeah it was a huge deal when Kidman took those kids to Mass. I think it was instrumental in the breakup. No doubt somewhere written in secret glowing blood is a pact those kids were to only be exposed to Scientology. Note we don't see those kids anywhere at all with Kidman. I think she lost or gave up total custody.

Thanks Filly. Seriously, what happens if say dad and daughter were at the mall and happened to walk past a Christian bookstore with a crucifix on a book cover and his daughter asked why is that man on that cross Dad? Would he then be violating a court order? Twice? Uhm, because he should have known the bookstore was on that side of the mall and he should have avoided walking by the store?

I just don't understand how a child can be sheltered to the point they are not exposed to a variety of religious beliefs. What happens when the kid she is playing with by dads house happens to mention Jesus. Is dad violating the court order because he should have discussed the issue with this childs parents first, and made sure their daughter knew in no uncertain terms should she EVER mention the word Jesus in front of her friend.

And what about friends or classmates that practise neither Christianity or Judaism? What happens to either parent if they happen to find themselves in that situation? Is mom too then in violation of a court order to not expose this child to any other beliefs? What if mom takes the daughter on a play date, or allows a play date with a family that has a crucifix in their home?

Clearly this court order is ludicrous, because I can't see how dad can be held responsible but mom wouldn't.

OT- One day my son was telling his best buddy who lives up the street, who is from India and I have no idea what this familys religious beliefs are, starting talking about Jesus. My son described the conversation that he kept ASKING this younger boy (they were going into 1st and 2nd grades at the time) if he believed in Jesus until the kid finally said yes, to shut my son up. It was after my son shared this conversation with me, I had to explain a bit of various beliefts age appropriately of course.

I'm curious if this 'restraining order' will hold up in court.

Still shaking my head about this one......

Is religion covered in the "joint legal" portion of a divorce agreement? Or is there a "religious clause" in the paperwork?

Heres my thoughts on this. When is knowledge a bad thing? It seems to me, both parents would encourage knowledge and questions and let the child at the proper time make their own choice. I know, I am a particular faith, but I do not discourage learning about any other faith, I say look for truth, find answers. Your children cannot use your light , they must have their own.

PorcineGranny said:

Heres my thoughts on this. When is knowledge a bad thing? It seems to me, both parents would encourage knowledge and questions and let the child at the proper time make their own choice. I know, I am a particular faith, but I do not discourage learning about any other faith, I say look for truth, find answers. Your children cannot use your light , they must have their own.

Click to expand...

I agree with this statement. My own parents exposed me to many different Christian denominations, but refused to have me baptized until I was able to make the decision myself, after both of them had been raised in very conservative religious traditions. I even explored other faiths outside of Christianity. I was 17 when I finally committed to the one that I feel was the right one for me.

I feel for this child, and feel this is something beyond her doing. It seems to be more of a disagreement between bitter parents who wish to place their own child in the midst of a dispute. It does not seem very loving. My advice to the child--explore on your own, and make your own decision when YOU feel comfortable.

Filly said:

Hmmm, I just reread and saw that Reyes had converted after the child was born. He said he was pressured to do so.

That doesn't count though. We say "We're Catholics. It's like the maffia. You never get out". My DD would have a field day with this case. She's forever reminding me that Judaism and Catholicism is one in the same. Thank goodness I exposed her to more than Sunday Mass, and that Catholic school education. This week she thinks she's going to become a Hindu. As if ya just snap your fingers.

Ohhhhhhhhhh, Cubby yeah it was a huge deal when Kidman took those kids to Mass. I think it was instrumental in the breakup. No doubt somewhere written in secret glowing blood is a pact those kids were to only be exposed to Scientology. Note we don't see those kids anywhere at all with Kidman. I think she lost or gave up total custody.

Click to expand...

Tom and Nicole have joint custody, and I remember when Suri was born they went and stayed with Tom and Katie. Also, years ago, Tom made a movie in Australia to be with his children. They know how to keep their kids out of the limelight. Now she lives in TN so it is easier on all of them...

I am not an expert on Nicole, however, my friend was in the movie Narnia with her, so I was a bit star struck.

It sounds like there wasn't a problem with exposing the daughter to Christianity until the father had her BAPTIZED without consulting the mother. Baptism is a big step and I can understand the need to impose on the father that he cannot make such dramatic decisions about his daughter's religion on his own. It is unfortunate that the law has to get involved but he clearly does not know appropriate boundaries. Hopefully, the the significance of his actions will be apparent and he will be able to control himself in the future.

Filly said:

Unfortunately this is what happens when we have to get the court's involved regarding our parenting. Sometimes.

Cubby I know nothing of the law, but what happened to Church/State?

This makes me think of when Nicole Kidman took her and Tom Cruise's kids to Mass. Look what happened.

My grandmom always says "A lil religion never hurt anybody".

Click to expand...

UBM

I could not agree more, Filly. When we ask a Judge to make our most intimate family decisions, this can happen. I don't know enough details of this case to criticize the Judge for his order.

Boyz_Mum said:

Is religion covered in the "joint legal" portion of a divorce agreement? Or is there a "religious clause" in the paperwork?

Click to expand...

I prepare divorces. Yes, religion is often a part of it.

Well the baptism part is done and over. No going back in time to undue that. While I realize the dad doing that without the permission of mom was wrong, how many babies or young children actually remember their baptism? I don't recall mine, and I'm sure my son doesn't remember his. I think this little girl looks pretty young and I kind of doubt she will really recall it. I can see the judge ordering the father to not share reminders of the event, such as pictures to influence the child one way or the other, but to forbid him from exposing this child to ANY type of Christianity, imo, is over the top and an interference of church and state.

I'm just not sure why the judge chose to impart these restrictions on dad and not both parents. What makes one choice better than the other? Why not order the parents to allow the child to see both and let the CHILD make the choice when she is old enough to do so? She will one way or another regardless of what either of her parents do eventually. And the sad point, is if the child sees her parents bickering about this for the duration of her childhood, she's likely to reject both.

I just think this is one thing, family court should stay out of.

jmo

Cubby said:

Well the baptism part is done and over. No going back in time to undue that. While I realize the dad doing that without the permission of mom was wrong, how many babies or young children actually remember their baptism? I don't recall mine, and I'm sure my son doesn't remember his. I think this little girl looks pretty young and I kind of doubt she will really recall it. I can see the judge ordering the father to not share reminders of the event, such as pictures to influence the child one way or the other, but to forbid him from exposing this child to ANY type of Christianity, imo, is over the top and an interference of church and state.

I'm just not sure why the judge chose to impart these restrictions on dad and not both parents. What makes one choice better than the other? Why not order the parents to allow the child to see both and let the CHILD make the choice when she is old enough to do so? She will one way or another regardless of what either of her parents do eventually. And the sad point, is if the child sees her parents bickering about this for the duration of her childhood, she's likely to reject both.

I just think this is one thing, family court should stay out of.

jmo

Click to expand...

UBM:

I promise you that family courts would LOVE to stay out of this. Talk to any Judge who has to make decisions about the most personal parts of a family's life and he/she will tell you "I hate this - I wish the parents were grown up enough to work this out without involving a stranger!"

The Court is in on this decision because the parents can't or won't manage it themselves.

Just to be a rabble-rouser, I'm going to ask this question: would most of us feel the same way if, instead of ruling that the child can't be exposed to Christianity, this Judge had ruled that the child cannot be exposed to Islam or Wicca? Interesting food for thought, I think.

I admit the Islam would be a little more difficult for me because there's a possibility that one of the parents could be sending/taking the child to a place that practices or encourages radical Islam. Admittedly the parent could be taking the child to a "Christian" church that advocates bombing abortion clinics, too, I guess. But I probably wouldn't have a problem with either parent exposing this child to their respective religions as long as the child wasn't showing discomfort or confusion about it AND it wasn't altering her body in some way or doing something permanent to her that she could not back out of later when she is old enough to make her own decision. Her father just taking her to church seems rather innocent and not something that is going to permanently scar her in some way, as far as I can tell.

I don't think baptism is that important unless the person decides to have it done for themselves. The real problem here is noted by the father:

Reyes said Judge Edward Jordan is the former head of the Decalogue Society, the Jewish Bar.

The judge needs to step away from this case. It is clear he is not capable of being unbiased! Just crazy.

southcitymom said:

UBM:

I promise you that family courts would LOVE to stay out of this. Talk to any Judge who has to make decisions about the most personal parts of a family's life and he/she will tell you "I hate this - I wish the parents were grown up enough to work this out without involving a stranger!"

The Court is in on this decision because the parents can't or won't manage it themselves.

Just to be a rabble-rouser, I'm going to ask this question: would most of us feel the same way if, instead of ruling that the child can't be exposed to Christianity, this Judge had ruled that the child cannot be exposed to Islam or Wicca? Interesting food for thought, I think.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't feel any differently, while it may not be my choice to practise either, back in the day when I was a member of babycenter there were quite a few fellow posters who practised Wicca. I never thought any differently of them as parents than any other parent. Also, this father is in Chicago, I am in the burbs of Chicago. There are all kind of various beliefs and communities in this area. All relatively close together as well. Just for the heck of it...
http://www.chicagomuslims.com/ I wonder, now that you propose it SCM, are both parents also court ordered to make sure this child is never ever exposed to anyone who practises the muslim faith, or wiccan? Heck, I live in a community we have a large middle eastern population.

While I realize judges would prefer to stay out of it, at some point they have to draw a line. I mean seriously, you could have two parents in court arguing about what kind of hair cut a child should have or what brand underwear they should wear.

I'm glad we live in a diverse community where my son has the opportunity to grow up with and interact with people of many different races and beliefs. While we may not share them, I don't view the differences as a threat to myself or my son. As this mother 'claims' her child being exposed to "christianity" will cause her daughter irreparable harm. I can rest assure you all, having been in this area my entire 44 years there are far more things happening in Chicago to worry about than a child being exposed to - God forbid- Christians.

Cubby said:

I wouldn't feel any differently, while it may not be my choice to practise either, back in the day when I was a member of babycenter there were quite a few fellow posters who practised Wicca. I never thought any differently of them as parents than any other parent. Also, this father is in Chicago, I am in the burbs of Chicago. There are all kind of various beliefs and communities in this area. All relatively close together as well. Just for the heck of it...
http://www.chicagomuslims.com/ I wonder, now that you propose it SCM, are both parents also court ordered to make sure this child is never ever exposed to anyone who practises the muslim faith, or wiccan? Heck, I live in a community we have a large middle eastern population.

While I realize judges would prefer to stay out of it, at some point they have to draw a line. I mean seriously, you could have two parents in court arguing about what kind of hair cut a child should have or what brand underwear they should wear.

I'm glad we live in a diverse community where my son has the opportunity to grow up with and interact with people of many different races and beliefs. While we may not share them, I don't view the differences as a threat to myself or my son. As this mother 'claims' her child being exposed to "christianity" will cause her daughter irreparable harm. I can rest assure you all, having been in this area my entire 44 years there are far more things happening in Chicago to worry about than a child being exposed to - God forbid- Christians.

Click to expand...

I'm all about people of every age being exposed to different belief systems and I definitely get that it's troublesome that the belief system of one of the parents is getting "buried" by this order. But - until I know more (whatever craziness led to a Judge actually having to decide this issue) - I'm not ready to assume the Court is biased.

Religion is a key issue in divorce and I don't see that changing. If we put religion in the same category as underwear or haircuts, a Judge wouldn't get a chance to make a decision because, as a society, we would have deemed religion exceedingly trivial.

But our country recognizes spiritual belief systems are intrinsically important when rearing children and this is a good thing.

What I am never glad about is two grown people who are unable to come to their own best conclusions about their child's spiritual life. That family dynamic is much worse for the child than what church she does or doesn't attend.

Dad baptizing without Mom's input.......Mom retaliating by calling Dad's religion harmful and running to a Judge - both courses of action are disrespectful and immature.

ETA - also, FWIW, the story makes it sound like the Dad had agreed to raise his daughter in the Jewish faith and that now he has changed his mind.

If this were me, I'd fight it tooth and nail. I'm the parent. Period.

any child born of a Jewish mother is Jewish, not half Jewish. Is this child not entitled to have some security in the matter of her religious upbringing? Should she be taken to Jewish services by her mother, and Christian services by her father? It sounds as though the father converted to Judaism, and that he consented to have the child reared as Jewish. The fact that he sent the mother a picture of the child's baptism sounds like an act of spite.
I would feel the same way if a Jewish father refused to abide by the agreements he had made regarding his child's religious upbringing. As in so many marriages, when Daddy stops loving Mommy- and vice versa- the children become pawns in the family dissolution.