Posted on 09/08/2009 11:02:37 AM PDT by JoeProBono
HARDINSBURG, Ky. (AP) -- A Kentucky woman says her 16-year-old son was baptized without her consent when he and fellow football players were taken to a Baptist revival by their coach.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
“Go, yes.
Baptism, no.”
That becomes a little tricky. I suppose it could be worked out between mother and son.
But if she really opposes this religion, she’d probably want to tell him not to listen, sing, pray, believe anything, say Grace, read any of the Bible passages. . . it gets a little strange to go to a religious retreat of any kind and do absolutely nothing. If you are not interested in learning and open to possibly acting on what you learn, why go?
How about those of us who do not hate/fear/sneer but simply believe differently?
Yes. Now you understand. Any public school authority-figure should stick to their job and not be on the lookout for converts.
Perhaps you didn't understand what I meant by "inherently coercive." It's like when your boss's daughter is selling chocolate bars for her team or whatever. There is no direct threat, but you buy some anyway.
The kid just wanted to be a part of something bigger than himself.
It is the parent who is in need of discipline here. Not the child.
I've seen these religiously-mixed marriages before, where the parents abdicate their responsibilities to their kids. They aren't able to work out their religious differences, so in order to avoid friction they decide NOT to decide -- they're NOT going to baptize the kid, NOT going to attend church, NOT give the kid any religious education, and then just 'let him decide' when he turns 18. It's de facto agnosticism, and the message it sends to the kid is that his parents don't think religion is important at all.
How is he going to make a decision, when he has been given absolutely no guidance and no education in the matter? You might as well expect him to be able to do calculus when he's never learned his times tables.
Really?
Because, NO.
It wouldn’t be a breach of the coach’s First Amendment rights.
He’s still free to practice HIS religion all by himself.
He doesn’t get guaranteed access to other peoples’ children because you think you can whip out the First Amendment and wrongly think we’ll all nod in ignorant agreement.
A school can DEFINITELY ban him from proselytizing and recruiting and he can scream “First Amendment !!!!” all he wants.
Indeed. That's understandable. The parents reached an agreement for their son to decide for himself, but they wanted to be a part of it. Other parents might've shrugged it off, but baptism is a very important event for these two.
And for a Catholic, any Baptism done (invoking the Trinity) is considered valid. So it’s not like they can “do it over” or “do it right.”
Some people see religous practices as an education.
Observing others’ practices can be helpful.
As a student at a Catholic prep school, I once went to a Bar Mitzvah and sat in the back, observing.
Very educational. And those Jews sure know how to have a comfy service. Kudos.
So we have two issues here;
1. Who was told what? Debateable, so there’s some question here. Frankly, parents should know EXACTLY what their children are up to, especially nowadays. But, parents tend to trus their kids’ coaches. Not for much longer, apparently.
2. Should a coach or other authority figure use their position for religious recruitment.
While there’s wiggle room on #1, #2 is quite clear.
I agree. My younger son has been anti-God since his older brother died. I'd be THRILLED to see him make a firm commitment to Christ.
But not without my full knowledge and under the influence of some public school employee.
Exactly! The fundies would be beside themselves with outrage.
Nah. Far more likely that the other parents are telling the truth, and there was disclosure, but the mom and/or the kid weren't paying attention.
The problem with the hard-line 'no religious activities' is that - especially in a small community with a majority evangelical-type population - that's going to limit extracurricular stuff severely. If you construe that strictly, can't go anywhere where a prayer might be offered, 'cause a parent might be offended.
I find it hard to believe, btw, that a Catholic father didn't make sure the kid was baptized as an infant. If the dad actually believes, then that baptism is a free gift to the kid and is good regardless of whether he becomes a Baptist or a Presbyterian or an Episcopalian. He wouldn't be a full member of an infant-baptism church anyhow until he reached the age of reason and was 'confirmed'. So if he was baptized already, the second baptism was a nullity. You can't be baptized twice. Baptists who become Catholics or Episcopalians don't get re-baptised either.
No, he went with the football coach and some other players and the Superintendent of Schools.
Anyone know if the kid was a starting player? Maybe he wouldn't have been if he didn't go along with the guys?
I have to fall back on the Founders. Prior to our Enlightened Modern Age, kids were taught their letters from Christian Scripture, and nobody, not a single Founding Father had a problem with this. Not even Thomas Jefferson spoke out against the Christian Bible being used to educate our children. That is enough of a thumbs up for me to endorse a Christian culture at the founding, and one that should stand today. No amount of discussion will sway me if the Founders were good with it. Heck, John Jay, first Supreme Court Chief Justice, said that Americans should prefer Christians for their leaders. Again, good enough for me.
I think without a permission slip, we don't know what mom thought she was allowing.
I think adults who want to invite my kid along to stuff, need to ask ME and not rely on what the kid wants me to know and what he remembers to tell me.
LOL, so true. They hate Cathoilics more than the moonbat muslims.
If you don’t see any wrong behavior with the coach and the principal, we’re done.
One reason could be that he was already baptised, and a “re-baptism” could be considered sacrilegious.
Well, apparently, he WAS recruiting for the Baptists.
Just not so secretly.
It’s one thing for a coach to lead a prayer for the team’s safety in the locker room. I’m sure some people could get angry about it, but I don’t see that as proselytizing or recruiting. It’s pretty easy to remain silent and not pray.
It’s another to lead them through a specific religious ceremony.
I’m willing to argue the facts of what the parents knew and when, but not of the appropriateness of a coach to be engaged in such behavior. Lines of responsibility and appropriateness have to be drawn.
that’s just silly. the Catholics make you study in an RCIA program for a year jumping through numerous hoops before bestowing baptism on you. it’s almost like they try to discourage you with all the classes you have to take. not at all like what happened here.
;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.