Judge ordered mother not to take child to church or read her scripture

Defilade · Nov 19, 2025

Mother says "Who the fuck are you? I'm not your property! and neither is my daughter. My daughter is my property!"

Celt · Nov 20, 2025

The court is overstepping here from the little bit ive read.

Grimscale · Nov 20, 2025

Saltwater60 said:
something that causes the child no harm.

That's the part of the equation that is not being told.

Supposedly the specific church the father fought to prevent the mother from exposing the child to is one of those fire & brimstone types. And exposure to it was harming the relationship the child had with the father.

Saltwater60 said:
I mean anything can be determined to cause psychological harm. Many say disciplining your kids does that these days.

I am not disputing these statements. However, IF there really is a cause for alarm, a temporary hold against taking the child to that specific church until the truth can be discovered harms no one.

Parzival · Nov 20, 2025

Their website looks like a typical modern non-denominational church.

Sadly, this is probably just two adults who can’t act like adults and the kid is caught in the middle.

fresch · Nov 20, 2025

Just so long as the child won't be late to the homosexual drag shows.
Fire the judge now.
Looks like they want to play survival of the fittest; they don't look that fit to me.
Would the judge be ok if it was islame?

Zerex · Nov 20, 2025

Unusual..................Dad may be porking the child and grooming her as a substitute wife.

Topic: Child abuse in the United States

Find the most up-to-date statistics and facts on child abuse in the U.S.

www.statista.com

Half a million cases of sex abuse of children in 2023.................many dads getting it on.

spat · Nov 20, 2025

Grimscale said:
That's the part of the equation that is not being told.

Supposedly the specific church the father fought to prevent the mother from exposing the child to is one of those fire & brimstone types. And exposure to it was harming the relationship the child had with the father.

I am not disputing these statements. However, IF there really is a cause for alarm, a temporary hold against taking the child to that specific church until the truth can be discovered harms no one.

If the church is really a danger to kids, just telling one mother she can't take her one kid there is *not* the answer.

So, either this is bullshit, or the Judge is OK endangering dozens of other kids.

This needs to be either nothing, or a full blown criminal investigation. There is no acceptable middle ground here.

tirwin1 · Nov 20, 2025

Celt said:
The court is overstepping here from the little bit ive read.

There is alot of that going around these days.

Grimscale · Nov 20, 2025

spat said:
If the church is really a danger to kids, just telling one mother she can't take her one kid there is *not* the answer.

So, either this is bullshit, or the Judge is OK endangering dozens of other kids.

This needs to be either nothing, or a full blown criminal investigation. There is no acceptable middle ground here.

There is only one mother and father in front of the judge. NOT the entire country. It would be a stretch for him to say "no one can go to this church".
What they may (or may not) be doing might not rise to a criminal act, but could impact a relationship between a parent and their child.

Saltwater60 said:
The mother could say not taking her there and saving her soul is harming her as well.

Subjective.

spat · Nov 20, 2025

Grimscale said:
There is only one mother and father in front of the judge. NOT the entire country. It would be a stretch for him to say "no one can go to this church".
What they may (or may not) be doing might not rise to a criminal act, but could impact a relationship between a parent and their child.

Subjective.

If it's not criminally endangering the kid, then the judge has no business interfering.

Let's say it's a real fire and brimstone church, and they're preaching that some aspect of the father's life is sinful and he's headed for eternal damnation. Is that really something the government should get involved in ?

I get "alienation of affection", but that's no excuse for the government to start micromanageing what is ultimately a private disagreement.

1st ammendment and all, the court should *really* not be able to order people to be silent about a subject except in very extreme circumstances (if even then).

If it would be unconstitutional for the legislature to pass a law, it should be unconstitutional for a judge to order it too.

Grimscale · Friday at 6:45 AM

spat said:
Let's say it's a real fire and brimstone church, and they're preaching that some aspect of the father's life is sinful and he's headed for eternal damnation. Is that really something the government should get involved in ?

And you don't think that this is, essentially, brainwashing?
Convincing a kid that their father is some kind of evil person because he may not follow all of the religion's rules and, ultimately, be subject to some unspecific and vague "punishment" after he dies?
It sounds sick to me.
I see it as no different than one parent trying to convince a kid they are trans and the other trying to save them.

Why is it that everyone wants to force everyone else into their own psychotic fantasy?

spat · Friday at 11:15 AM

Grimscale said:
And you don't think that this is, essentially, brainwashing?
Convincing a kid that their father is some kind of evil person because he may not follow all of the religion's rules and, ultimately, be subject to some unspecific and vague "punishment" after he dies?
It sounds sick to me.
I see it as no different than one parent trying to convince a kid they are trans and the other trying to save them.

Why is it that everyone wants to force everyone else into their own psychotic fantasy?

I don't disagree.

But do we really want the government deciding what topics are dangerous brainwashing ?

What if it's the father who is trying to trans the kid here and the "dangerous brainwashing" from the church is just that there are only 2 genders, and you don't get to pick yours ?

There are 2 sides (or more) to every conflict, and I certainly don't trust the government to pick the correct one on an ideological difference.

I'm certainly no religious zealot, but lately I think they're right about more topics than the left wing secular zealots who seem to include half the judiciary.

Grimscale · Saturday at 8:25 AM

Saltwater60 said:
I can’t imagine they preach this all the time but I don’t know.

spat said:
What if

This is the real problem. WE DON'T KNOW all the facts of this case. We can only base our opinion on what little dribbles of soundbites get put out.

I know there are churches who are all fire & brimstone. I've seen them.
I also know there can be fathers who are not actually thinking of their child's best interests. Same with mothers.

But if a father is honestly trying to have a normal relationship with his child, and make sure that child is safe, I absolutely would hope that a court would pause any indoctrination being forced by the mother until all of the facts are out. Once the damage is done it is almost impossible to break.

spat said:
But do we really want the government deciding what topics are dangerous brainwashing ?

No. I would hope We The People would be able to decide that.

But what can you do if the parents of a child are doing things that are part of their religion, but very detrimental to the health and well being of a child? Let them continue?

spat · Saturday at 1:18 PM

Grimscale said:
This is the real problem. WE DON'T KNOW all the facts of this case. We can only base our opinion on what little dribbles of soundbites get put out.

I know there are churches who are all fire & brimstone. I've seen them.
I also know there can be fathers who are not actually thinking of their child's best interests. Same with mothers.

But if a father is honestly trying to have a normal relationship with his child, and make sure that child is safe, I absolutely would hope that a court would pause any indoctrination being forced by the mother until all of the facts are out. Once the damage is done it is almost impossible to break.

No. I would hope We The People would be able to decide that.

But what can you do if the parents of a child are doing things that are part of their religion, but very detrimental to the health and well being of a child? Let them continue?

The problem there is that if you create a system where we *need* to know what that church was teaching in order to reach a conclusion, then the conclusion will be subject to the whims of fashion.

Now, I agree, if it's causing actual physical harm to the child, then that's actionable abuse.

But if it's just causing the child to develop opinions that aren't in fashion, then that's the whole point of the 1A. Even if holding out of fashion beliefs could cause social harm.

The last administration would consider the opinion that there are only 2 genders and they are immutable as "harmful", and indeed, expressing that opinion in public *would* have been dangerous.

fresch · Saturday at 3:46 PM

What is the father's belief?
Why can't children have anxiety, very common in young girls/ children.
What is the judge's belief?
If the father tells her that, killing someone will end up with her going to jail for life or being put to death herself (I know we don't do that any more), would the judge say not to teach the laws of the land?
Where is the fathers statements on this?
I know many here believe they crawled out of the mud puddle and if so who are they to tell anyone anything, just some other life form no better than any other. Making life only eat, shit, fuck, die, just like the rest of the other life on earth.
Myself I believe in God and Christ and yes there are those who say they do only to take advantage of others.

A judge has zero business telling anyone who can go to church or not.

As normal we need more information and family court is a joke.

Judge ordered mother not to take child to church or read her scripture

20×102mm Vulcan

.700 Nitro Express

.450/400 Nitro Ex

.338 Win Mag

20×102mm Vulcan

.44 mag

.338 Win Mag

20×102mm Vulcan

.308 Win

.950 JDJ

20×102mm Vulcan

.475 A&M Magnum

.338 Win Mag

20×102mm Vulcan

.950 JDJ

.338 Win Mag

20×102mm Vulcan

.950 JDJ

.338 Win Mag

20×102mm Vulcan

.950 JDJ

.338 Win Mag