BS: Religious child abuse

Subject: BS: Religious child abuse
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 03:24 AM

Last night I watched a programme on television called Baby Bible Bashers about child evangelists whose young minds had been twisted into the service of god by fear, greed or a desperate need to win the love of a parent. Samuel had been told at the age of three that he had to become a preacher or he would burn in hell. Aged seven he had become a mascot of his Mississippi community, railing against the evil of drink, abortion and homosexuality – concepts that he hardly understood. His meat-head parents were quick to point out that they did not spare the rod when he rebelled and whilst we we're subjected to his father's god-fearing crap, we hear the cries of the little lad in the background as he is beaten by his mother.

We then saw the missionary zeal of Terry, ordained as a Baptist minister at eight and now making a healthy profit for his father and grandmother as congregations clamour for his sermons and 'miracle healing'. His father talked about 'the organisation that is Terry', selling merchandise with Little Man of God slogans and telling us about his ambition to see Terry preaching to audiences of 30,000. It seems there are millions out there who believe in these mini messiahs. There was more but I was so angry and upset I turned it off.

In the UK the parents would be prosecuted for child abuse, which this undoubtedly was, and the children would be taken into care by social services. I the US we saw whole congregations not only colluding with this abuse, but encouraging it. Can anyone tell me: are these people congenitally stupid or has religious brainwashing destroyed every iota of common sense?

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: GUEST,Andy
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 04:56 AM

Leveller,
Probably both. Stupid and brainwashed.

Regards

Andy

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 04:59 AM

I can see the start of another yah- boo row here, so let's point out at the start that 99% of religious people of all faiths are just fine (even if some of us disagree with them), and that forcing children like rhubarb isn't confined to religion. Remember the baby William Hague at one of Thatcher's rallies? The little girls groomed for beauty contests? Kids who go to university at 11 years old? Kids signed up for (soccer) football clubs at the first legal moment? Little Foetus Osmond?

It's normal for people to admire a clever child, and usually they don't see the stress and heartbreak that may be present behind the scenes. And it's normal for parents to want their child to be clever, and to show off that talent- I bet many of you have taken your offspring to folk clubs etc. to show off (and encourage of course) their talents.

IU'm sorry for the kids when this goes too far, but it's really all part of human history, maybe even part of how we got to be what we are.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:26 AM

I agree with you PMB, but the programme I happen to be commenting on was about people who claimed that they were being instructed by god to abuse their children in this way, physically. mentally and emotionally - the children weren't especially clever or in any way special, just what their parents had made them. I can't say I've seen many kids being forced to like folk music - my 17-year old can't stand it but my 8-year old thinks it's brilliant, is desperate to play fiddle like Eliza and has Bellowhead on every waking hour (could probably count as parent abuse).

I think the point I'm trying to make is, why aren't right-minded religious people stopping this from happening? Remember Burke's epithet: 'Evil flourishes when good men do nothing'.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 07:45 AM

There is a long history of child abuse in religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 08:45 AM

First you have to know that it's going on. And then someone has to report it. And then someone has to WANT to do something, law or no law.
And many, many people believe that it is a parental right to physically abuse a child (I'm not talking a simple whap on the bottom here, I'm talking beatings).

And they HAVE been prosecuted, unfortunately after the child is found dead or badly hurt. The defense by the parents that they were "driving the devil out" or something like that doesn't wash in the courts, either.

What was in the film is, in my opinion and based upon the description, greed and exploitation. Yes, it's wrong and yes, the child's life is probably twisted.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 09:14 AM

The people involved in this this cannot be Christian as a true Christian has to be seen to be 'walking the walk' or 'living the life'. Jesus had a true compassion for children and would have insisted that they be loved, not maltreated.
I also think that true Christian people should and would not 'use' gifts of healing etc for commercial reasons. I will pray, hands on, for anyone for healing for no charge. If God chooses to heal them as a result of my asking then so be it.
Many people who call themselves Christian do so oblivious to the full belief and calling which can be seen in the way they live their life.
All Christians make mistakes but true Christians can be seen to be trying to 'live the life' or 'walk the walk' mentioned before.
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 09:27 AM

It always amazes me how, in what is here a relatively poor area, the ministers of certain churches dress better than many rock stars. They drive BMWs and have 5 bedroom houses bought from donations by their congregations. I spoke to one of the ministers after noticing that he'd got a new car. He said that his congregation expected him to live in style, but I couldn't help noticing that a lot of his flock were barely scraping by and the rent he owed us (an Anglican church hiring out the church hall) was 6 months in arrears.

I didn't watch the programme in question because I knew I'd have the same feelings as theleveller above... people do the worst things in God's name.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 09:38 AM

Sorry, Georgiansilver, but it's a total cop-out to say they were not true Christians. They believe that they are and the lad, Terry. was paraded in front of literally hundreds of people in Baptist churches across the south. If all these people weren't 'true' Christians, what were they? Also, Terry was ordained as a Baptist minister at the age of 8. Are you saying that Baptists aren't true Christians? I must confess that I don't understand the strange world that is American Protestantism but it seems to condone very odd things that, to me, would appear totally anti-christian. George Bush claims that god talks to him by name but he thinks nothing of executing his own countrymen and waging war on others. Is he not a true Christian?

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:22 AM

Terry was ordained as a Baptist minister at the age of 8. That must be a pretty peculiar sort of Baptist.

Isn't it one of the defining aspects of the Baptists, and the reason they are called Baptists, that they insist that members should not be baptised until they are adults?

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:39 AM

Beware of generalisations. Not ALL Baptists are weird, nor are all Christians, the same as not all atheists drag their children back to the swamps to get in touch with their *beginnings.:-) What you saw was appalling and wrong.

Remember,

There is so much bad in the best of us
And, so much good in the worst of us
That it hardly behoves any of us
To talk about the rest of us.

I don't mean these things shouldn't be brought to light, but that we have had a lot of touchy threads, lately, slagging off on those who believe in god and those who do not. I think one more thread is one where we must all be mindful of our fellow Mudcatters and not make sweeping assumptions.

Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Megan L
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:45 AM

Weel put lass I was going tae say if they folk didny hae the Guid Man tae blame they wid find someone else rather than admit they were abusive people.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 12:04 PM

"...but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."
                                                   --Matthew 18: 6

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:09 PM

Well said, Kat, and appreciated.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: GUEST,Tolerance
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 01:39 PM

I'm as tolerant as the next person but this has to stop. We register sex offenders don't we? We limit their movements and make them check in with the authorities when they move to a new town. The same thing can be done with people like these religious nuts.Give them a test. Ask them things like "Do you believe in evolution?" Then we can spot them easier. Maybe it would be best to put a tatoo on their wrist. A cross or a star of David or something like that. Otherwise they might take over and mess up the world for the rest of us. Drastic steps sure. And it won't be cheap. But the time has come - don't you agree? Stand up for freedom of thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 03:21 PM

Whose freedom of thought are you referring to then Guest Tolerance? Isn't freedom of thought for ALL or just you and whoever agrees with you?. I too did not like what I read in the initial post and believe that these people should be stopped...not because of their beliefs but because of their actions and maltreatment.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 03:43 PM

GS, I think Guest,Tolerance, is being a bit heavy with the irony, at least it seems that way to me.

How about if the title were just "Child Abuse" which is really what it is about? I mean, people will use all kinds of excuses to defend being abusive.

Seemingly not as physically abusive, here is something I was unaware of in Nepal: Click.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:26 PM

It's not about freedom of thought, Tolerance, nor for that matter freedom of faith.

This is a question of child abuse. Anytime an adult makes use of the power that he/she has over an innocent child to inculcate ideas and practises which the child is neither old nor mature enough to understand that is abuse.

It is an abuse of the trust that the child places in adults, and wholly inappropriate behaviour, whether it is about sex, politics, or religion, and when it is done to generate income for the adult it is doubly reprehensible.

The adults in these cases are not fit to be parents, and are certainly very far removed from anything that I would recognise as a Christian.

I think, assuming that there is a God, that there will be an especially unpleasant corner of hell reserved for such as these.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:32 PM

As a Christian I have become aware of many kinds of abuse through contacts with missionaries who keep us informed...particularly of children and youth. Things like female circumcision and footbinding..which...yes...still does happen. I guess until 'The World' takes a stand...certain parts of it will sport abuse as part of their everyday living. We all need to do what we can whether by writing to the relevant authorities or getting 'involved' in some other way, even financing people who are prepared to stand for good. Many will discuss it and criticise those who perpetrate it but only the few get involved.
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:48 PM

Don, that is crap. Virtually the entirety of elementary education involves inculcating children with ideas that they are not mature enough to understand.

The alphabet
Counting
Grammar
Socialised behaviour
History
Washing
Brushing teeth
Table manners
English
French
German
Latin
Greek
Biology
Chemistry
Physics
Geography

Good God man you have worked in schools where children were NOT inculcated with such things, and I KNOW you know what the children (and their parents) were like...

The abuse lies in terror. Luckily I never went to a school run by religions, but I had friends who went to convents, and I know at second hand of the calculating terror wielded by nuns.

Of course, it also lies in teaching madness...

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:48 PM

"Anytime an adult makes use of the power that he/she has over an innocent child to inculcate ideas and practises which the child is neither old nor mature enough to understand that is abuse."



                   Sending a child to Sunday School out to qualify, then.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:50 PM

"...but Monopoly is so much fun
I'd hate to spoil the game
And I'm sure it wouldn't interest
Anybody
Outside of a small circle of friends."

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 05:57 PM

Anytime an adult makes use of the power that he/she has over an innocent child to inculcate ideas and practises which the child is neither old nor mature enough to understand that is abuse.

Have to say I agree with the others. That is a very sweeping statement. One of my greatest pleasures, these days, is being able to teach my grandson about spirituality, books, music, learning, nature, etc. all from my point of view, sanctioned by my daughter and her partner and greatly enjoyed by my grandson. I've done this since he was two days old and he is a remarkable four year old at this point showing no signs of abuse.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 06:03 PM

What papa Mozart did to his son was similar and for the same profit reasons.

The difference is the talent and the product.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 06:09 PM

I won't bother rising to the bait of that bunch of bollocks from Mr. Bridge.


"Sending a child to Sunday School out to qualify, then".

I can only assume that you don't consider this subject worthy of serious thought. There is undoubtedly a world of difference between teaching children about "Baby Jesus", his birth, his life, and his essentially good and humanitarian message, and setting up a child to become a religious bigot, and a homophobe, and to preach those concepts so that his dad can drive around in a Merc 380 wearing designer suits.

One, as you well know is education, the other is unequivocal abuse.

Now I'm out of here and those of you who want can continue to defend the indefensible.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 06:15 PM

Just one thing Kat. I applaud that, and am doing the selfsame thing with my Grandchildren.

If they are learning the subjects you mention, there is nothing there that falls outside of what a child Would be equipped to learn and understand.

Certainly nothing fitting into the category of what I referred to as abuse.

DT

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 06:22 PM

Thanks for that, Don. I hope you do see, though, that your initial statement was rather broad.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Alice
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:19 PM

Child abuse in the name of religion... or the name of anything, is a crime. Religion is no excuse to abuse children or adults.
See

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Alice
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:20 PM

See


Child Abuse

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:24 PM

Obviously what the program depicted was child abuse. Problem is that some Mudcatters who can only be described as rabidly anti-religion--just the counterpart to Jerry Falwell, etc--seem to be bound and determined to allege that this is a typical situation for a religious family. It's back to the same old observation--which some people seem never to understand--religion can be abused--just like so many other beliefs--including patriotism, socialism--and secularism.

One of our stalwart Mudcatters--who no doubt sees himself as a secularist-- advocated "stamping out" religion. This person is no more a typical secularist than the family depicted is a typical religious family.

And, as I've said earlier, I'm not in the least religious--just interested in fair play even for some aspects of life which are anathema to some Mudcatters--like religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:38 PM

Ron - Your concept of "fair play" is incredibly bias.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Feb 08 - 10:50 PM

If the shoe fits....

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 12:48 AM

Hey Don Have You Seen The Movie 'JESUS CAMP ???

There are some priceless cameos and frightening debauchery of young souls.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 04:00 AM

The problem, Don, lies in the sloppy phrasing of your post first criticised. One knee-jerk too many.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 04:19 AM

The scandal of sexual and physical abuse of children practiced by the clergy against children placed in their care over many decades has totally broken the grip of the Catholic Church here in Ireland (probably the only good thing to have come out of the whole sordid affair).
Some years ago a woman claiming to have been abused as a child by her priest, attempted to take her case to court. The police applied to obtain the relevant church records to investigate the matter; the bishop not only refused access, but informed the victim that if such a request was made again he would sue her for harassment.
That churchman (O'Connell) is still opposing access to church documents.
Up to relatively recently pedophile churchmen practiced their 'hobbies' freely under the protection of the church hierarchy, who covered up their activities as long as was possible, then moved them on to the next parish to 'continue the good work'.
Child abuse has been a widespread phenomenon in the church in Ireland; so far, I believe we have only seen the tip of the iceberg.
It really isn't good enough to claim that these savages are not 'real Christians'.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 05:29 AM

Well said Jim!

I suppose there was only one real Christian, and look what the bastards did with him.

In the modern world only pseudo-Christianity is useful to those who pull the strings.

The real sentiments of love, brotherhood,humility, as espoused by Jesus the philosopher have become an embarrassment.
The adherents of modern organised religion are all to blame, it has become mostly about "self", in this life.....and the next ...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 05:42 AM

It IS good enough to claim that. You cannot tar all priests with the same brush. Any person who abuses children or exploits their 'talents' for profit is NOT a true Christian. Fortunately there are not many of the type mentioned above to blacken the name of Christianity.
Jim it is attitudes like yours which cast judgements over whole groups of people not just the perpetrators and bring shadows over the people who are 'living the life'...'walking the walk'. Christians are human and make mistakes in the way they 'TRY' to live a Christian life as we all fall short of the Glory of God....but blatant abusers and exploiters cannot be considered Christian as they are clearly not living as Christians only claiming to be for their own ends.
Historically, surgeons who operated on patients and lost them through negligence would have their 'work' covered up and many other occupations...care homes where the elderly were abused etc etc....fortunately in our modern era, many of these abuses are coming to light but it does not make all surgeons or all care workers abusers.
All abusers, in whatever walk of life should be dealt with in context. They are personally responsible for their abuse and should be dealt with by the relevant justice system.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 07:26 AM

As I said, every single report I have ever had from people who went to schools run by nuns was to the broad effect that they learnt thier psychological "disciplinary" skills from Frey Torquemada. Twisted virgins who fucked kids brains.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: goatfell
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 07:49 AM

as a Christian I didn't watch it because it is abuse, but's that's American's for you, well some of them anyway, I mean look at their president and you'll see what I man, mind you theyu would probly do the same thing in Australia as well because they send their children out to make money by busking in the streets, now I don't mind it if the child is a teenager but I'm talking about preteens here busking outin the streets in Australia at night time to me that is abuse because a man/woman could come along and sexually abuse them, but then the Austrains well some anyway don't take care their children anyway they just take their children to the beach and then the adults will sit back and the child is off out of sight and then a while later the adults are out their chair (drunk) some of them shouting on their child, now don't tell me that isn't a form of abuse.
But that's Australia for you

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 09:48 AM

Sorry GS
Unless the church (not individual priests in this case, but the hierarchy of the church (right up to 'God's representative on earth) take responsibility for the atrocities which have taken place, the church can have no credibility.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: goatfell
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 10:05 AM

I'm sorry for writng what I wrote about Australia and America,well some of the things not all and the things I wrote about Australia is really Western Australia because I don't really know if they do that in the rest of the country. so I'm sorry

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 11:21 AM

Arran - As you are in Australia, was it Christian charity that drove earlier settlers to take the native children from their parents? I've always been left with the impression that they really thought they were doing the right thing at the time. I wonder how they came to that?

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Kent Davis
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 12:58 PM

I worked with abused children for nearly 10 years, mostly as a supervisor in treatment programs but, very briefly, as a child protectective service worker.   

I have not seen "Baby Bible Bashers" so I can't comment on the show itself, and obviously have no knowledge of whether or not those children are being abused.

I will comment on the information that theleveller provided, because it shows important points about child protective service work. First, I appreciate his concern in bringing the information to our attention. However, it does those children little good that the allegations are on Mudcat. Anyone who believes that the children are being abused has a moral obligation to report the abuse to the relevant authorities. U.S. citizens in certain professions also have a legal obligation to report it. Reports can usually be made by calling a "child abuse hotline". If no one has contacted the child protective service workers in the children's home counties, then no investigation will take place. If there is no investigation, there will be no intervention.   

Second, when child protective service workers get an allegation of abuse, they must consider two issues: is the allegation VALID and is the allegation FOUNDED. We'll consider the second issue first. An allegation is FOUNDED if it is shown to be true. (However, it does not necessarily need to be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt"; the standard of proof is not the same as in a criminal court.)

The other issue is whether the allegation is VALID. An allegation is VALID if the action reported WOULD BE abuse IF it were true.

Imagine that you are a child protective services worker. You get a call from a woman worried about the way her son's ex-girlfriend is raising their children. The grandmother says, "That woman smokes, and drinks beer, and sits around watching HBO. She hardly ever cooks (unless you call throwing something in the microwave "cooking") and the house is a mess and she never reads to the children. She lets her new boyfriend stay overnight, and she says curse words in front of the children, and she lets the third-grader stay up till 9 p.m., and she lets the older girl wear tight skirts way above her knees. Can't you take the children away?" What would you tell this grandmother?

I don't know how it is in other countries, but in the U.S. you would have to say something like, "No, I can't take the children away, not unless there is more to the story than you are telling me. Even if everything you say is true, those complaints are not VALID as abuse allegations. She may be a bad parent, but being a bad parent is not the same as being a child abuser."

When I read theleveller's initial post, I certainly see cause for concern. I see ambiguous statements that might represent valid complaints or might not. What I don't see (and please remember that I didn't see the show itself but only theleveller's post) is a clear statement of a valid allegation of child abuse. What (specifically)was the information that led to the conclusion that these children are being abused?

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: GUEST,Tolerance
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 01:30 PM

China has had some success by limiting couples to one child per family. Perhaps if we limit identified Christians to one child per couple we could lessen the damage they are capible of doing. It's worth considering. Then in a few generations their numbers would dwindle and the world would be a better place - and safer for those of us who favor freedom of thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 01:36 PM

Australians take their kids to the beach and get their heads bitten off by sharks. And Americans. You can say it's not abuse, but its not your head getting bit off.

I saw a documentary called Jaws and everybody in this town wouldn't let the Sherriff close the beach and stop the heads getting bitten off.

Capitalist bastards eh....?

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Alice
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 01:43 PM

A dictionary definition of child abuse is mistreatment including neglect, beating, and sexual molestation. It doesn't matter what belief system excuses the abuser, abuse is still abuse. It has nothing to do with religious intolerance. Abuse is abuse.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 02:00 PM

"Perhaps if we limit identified Christians to one child per couple we could lessen the damage they are capible of doing."

             G Tolerance - That's a great idea!



                   "I saw a documentary called Jaws..."


             WLD - I saw that same documentary.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Amos
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 03:13 PM

And around and around it goes....

The point must be made that much religious indoctrination is not physical abuse, and perhaps not really emotional abuse as such -- a benevolent education into Christianity is no scarier than listening to environmentalists declaim, I suppose -- but the issue that is being avoided is whether indoctrination with false or authoritarian data is intellectual abuse. I believe that it can be. The alphabet is a tool, for managing the interface with the social world. So 's potty training and multiplication tables. So even though they may not be fully understood, they are data that the growing child finds referents for and can learn to think clearly with. This is not the case with views of Godhood and the often qwuirky and nonsensical moral structures handed about to children in religious communities of one or another sort -- not just Christian, as anyone who has read Infidel can tell you. But in this culture, they have the majority of the pattern.

Any way, we have no common parlance for this sort of intellectual abuse, and therefore the assertion can easily be rejected. But that makes it none the less true, founded and valid (except under the law).


A

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Slag
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 04:06 PM

The credo of child abuse is "Child Abuse" regardless of whatever type of camouflage they employ. The chameleon character of the abuser is symptomatic and includes virtually any walk of life. Cops, ministers, congressmen, teachers, taxi drivers, psychologist and so on. To begin a thread about religious child abuse initial hit me as a bit biased but I lay aside my own bias to analyze the given.

Sexual child abuse does find cover in the various acceptable and even honorable occupations of mankind. It is vile and rightly condemned by any person of decent moral character. Even convicts in prison have a code higher than the child abuse and they, in solidarity, have a way of dealing with them if the said abuser are found to be among that population.

The type of abuse of over-regimentation and brainwashing that certain religious practitioners commit is different than sexual abuse although they somehow have a way of operating hand-in-hand. I believe it becomes attractive to the controlling, power monger because of the degree of isolation that is afforded by being out of the mainstream and a certain distrust of the secular system. It is an ideal situation for the abusers, in that isolation is one of the key elements of abuse of any sort. Non-acceptance and intolerance on either side greatly helps to isolate these elements. Throw in denominationalism and the autonomy of local churches and the idea of being the big duck in a little pond will bring out the nature of the abuser.

This, by no means, limits abuse to this scenario. It just creates a more perfect environment for it. Teachers become little gods or dictators, or worse. Prison guards, shrinks. They all establish a little bailiwick where they become only answerable to themselves. In order to have a healthy society every member ought to be answerable to every other member in someway, thus promoting responsibility. Trust but verify! Ever hear that before?

The collateral abuse falls upon religion itself and gives the general enterprise a great big black eye. Any religion! It is little wonder that organized religion is finding itself on the defensive. A lot of the criticism is well deserved for not policing their own.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious child abuse
From: Peace
Date: 16 Feb 08 - 04:09 PM

And no one has mentioned the military yet.