Judge to Christian mom: No 'homophobic' teaching

WorldNetDaily ^ | 10/31/2003

[WillRain]

A Colorado mother is appealing a child custody decision in which a court barred her from teaching homosexuality is wrong.

Cheryl Clark, who says she is a Christian, has been ordered by Denver County Circuit Judge John W. Coughlin to "make sure that there is nothing in the religious upbringing or teaching that the minor child is exposed to that can be considered homophobic."

The directive arose from the decision to award joint parenting responsibilities for her daughter to a practicing homosexual.

"Forbidding the raising of children in the parent's Christian beliefs is an anathema to parental rights and religious freedom," said Mathew D. Staver, president and general counsel of Florida-based Liberty Counsel. "Must the mother rip out pages of the Bible that say homosexuality is against nature, or must she cover her child's ears if her pastor preaches about sexual purity?"

Staver explained to WorldNetDaily Clark and Elsey McLeod were in a lesbian relationship that broke up after Clark became a Christian and concluded homosexual behavior was wrong.

The Denver court gave McLeod joint custody of Clark's adopted daughter, Emma, even though McLeod had no legal relationship to the girl. It also, in conjunction with the ruling in favor of McLeod, said Clark cannot raise her child with any religious teaching or upbringing that is "homophobic."

Staver said courts cannot "give parents a no-win decision of either abandoning their Christian beliefs or abandoning their children."

The definition of "homophobic," Staver noted, is "all across the board," from being fearful of homosexuals to disagreeing with their lifestyle.

"It takes no stretch of the imagination to envision a judge finding the mother in contempt of court for merely teaching her daughter about the Biblical truths on homosexuality," he said.

Liberty Counsel filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the mother in her case before the Colorado Court of Appeals.

Staver notes the U.S. Supreme Court has long held that the Constitution guarantees the freedom to "worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience." Similarly, he said, the high court has acknowledged "the values of parental direction of the religious upbringing and education of our children in their early and formative years have a high place in our society."

Another troubling aspect of this case, he said, is the award of visitation and joint parenting responsibilities to a third-party who has no legal relationship to the daughter or the mother.

The decision, according to Staver, stands in direct conflict with precedent throughout the country that denies visitation to a third party based solely on that person's prior sexual relationship with the legal parent.

Staver told WND he is not aware of any similar cases in the U.S., although there have been some in which a judge has told a parent not to say anything degrading about the other parent's lifestyle.

None, to his knowledge, however, have gone to the extent of Coughlin, issuing a directive that restricts a parent's religious practice.

[sns5151]

Does New World Order ring out?

I am not sure that any Gov. or public official should have a lifetime term of office.
The average Joe in this country doesn't have that kind of job security.


The only lawyer I ever liked or trusted, was my divorce lawyer.
Great guy, but even he will not touch this one.

[m1-lightning]

I am not sure that any Gov. or public official should have a lifetime term of office.

I believe one of the reasons for a judge having a lifetime membership was to prevent politics from corrupting opinions. From the sounds of this guy I think politics is just what he needs.

[american spirit]

Oh, so in other words you can be a smarta$$ and post an uneducated opinion on something you know nothing about and don't even have the stones to back up your position? Is that what you're saying?

[theDentist]

You're right. And it's a pity.

[skeeter]

He's trying to keep her from instilling a sense of hatred or revulsion towards the father who has joint custody.

Unless you think our beliefs, values & opinions should be dictated by law you should be horrified that any judge would dare to order a parent what they should teach her child.

If this is allowed to stand the end can't be too far off.

[antiRepublicrat]

Unless you think our beliefs, values & opinions should be dictated by law you should be horrified that any judge would dare to order a parent what they should teach her child.

I am horrified at that aspect, but what to do when one parent basically tells the judge that she will train the kid to hate or revile the other parent? She probably should have kept her mouth shut. But a better agreement could have been reached here, and I don't know who was the stubborn one who kept that from happening.

[WillRain]

I did a serch under "homosexual", "custody", "religion" and "judge" and got nothing. Either mine was the first or the others were keyworded obscurely.

Also, if it was published yesterday and that does not qualify as breaking news, then where DOES it go? It is NEWS to a lot of us. It's not like the thing happened 8 months ago?
Not being hostile here but what would you suggest?

[WillRain]

I did a serch under "homosexual", "custody", "religion" and "judge" and got nothing.

Perhaps a note about more extensive keywording would be in order.

What, I'm supposed to do a serch for every word in the article?

[WillRain]

I'd advise a call to the ACLJ forthwith.

[TomServo]

I never use keywords. I always search for a significant word from the title. In this case, I used "homophobic". And in some cases, I have searched every word in the title.

[WillRain]

But there is nothing in the news that says the mother was planing on teaching anything hateful about the lover.

This was a pre-emptive strike, apparently, which ASSUMED there would be "hateful" things said.

If a man and woman divorce and the dad turns out to be demonsterably a liar and mom says to Junior in the course of his religious training "We know that God hates it when we lie" has she bashed her ex or called him evil?

by no means.

Likewise, this mother may be legally restrained, I suppose, from saying "my former lover is an evil nasty person because she is a lesbian" but she may NOT, IMO, be restrained from saying in the course of religious training "We know that God does not want us involved with this or any other type of sex outside of marriage"

And all that's besides the outragious idea that this lover has any legal right to ever see the kid anyway which is something even grandparents have not been able to win in the courts.

[mcg1969]

I am horrified at that aspect, but what to do when one parent basically tells the judge that she will train the kid to hate or revile the other parent?

Fair point, although I think to forbid this kind of parental influence under any circumstances would be quite unwise. I can conceive of circumstances where it would be reasonable, even necessary, for one parent to teach the child to hate/revile/reject the other. Whether this particular circumstance meets this criteria is a reasonable matter of debate though.

Furthermore, not only is this woman not biologically related, she had no legal relationship to the girl before this court order, either. I take that to mean that she did not formally adopt this girl.

[gcruse]

The weed of hatred bears peculiar fruit.

[Labyrinthos]

I did a serch under "homosexual", "custody", "religion" and "judge" and got nothing. Either mine was the first or the others were keyworded obscurely. Also, if it was published yesterday and that does not qualify as breaking news, then where DOES it go? It is NEWS to a lot of us. It's not like the thing happened 8 months ago? Not being hostile here but what would you suggest?

I just did a "title search" for the word "homophobic" and found three seperate threads posted at 1:37 a.m., 7:43 a.m., and then yours at 11:47 a.m. Although the search mechanism is less than perfect, sticking to titles rather than key words should help, provided the poster uses the original title rather than making up her own.

As to what constitutes breaking news, I really don't know, although I suspect there is a definition someplace around here. I do see a lot of posts under breaking news that were obviously lifted from the mornings newspaper concerning events that took place a day or two earlier. To me, that is news, but not breaking news worthy of a side-bar headline. I suggest you just post under news/breaking news but save the side bar headline for really important matters that are breaking as you type. But that's just my opinion. (BTW, I wasn't trying to be hostile either.)

[antiRepublicrat]

Furthermore, not only is this woman not biologically related, she had no legal relationship to the girl before this court order, either. I take that to mean that she did not formally adopt this girl.

Curiouser and curiouser.

[antiRepublicrat]

But there is nothing in the news that says the mother was planing on teaching anything hateful about the lover.

Since this is probably the first instance of this happening out of many cases where one parent turned homosexual, it is likely that the woman was showing an intent to do so, so much that the judge took this extreme measure.

[KC_for_Freedom]

You got my point, I don't know the specifics of the case but beliefs are something difficult to set up a restraining order against. In every case of dual child custody, the players seem mostly to try to badmouth the care of the other. This because divorces are usually not pleasant. But the results with respect to the child are best when both parrents teach respect for the views of the other. In this case, there are built-in parameters that make it hard to teach that respect. It can be done, even those of us who don't want to see homosexuality brought into the mainstream know that there are individual homosexuals who live public lives which would not upset the mainstream.

[sns5151]

I'd advise a call to the ACLJ forthwith.


Thanks for the info. Looking into Now.




Three passions,
simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life

The longing for love,
the search for knowledge
and
unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind.
authour: Bertand Russell

[mcg1969]

Since this is probably the first instance of this happening out of many cases where one parent turned homosexual,

You've got it backwards :) This was a lesbian couple! And one of them turned heterosexual (or at least, gave up her lesbian ways) when she became a Christian. And again, the other so-called "parent" was not legally related to the child (say, through adoption, which is common when gay couples raise a kid together).

[longtermmemmory]

what kind of Federal Judge hears family law cases?