Freedom of religion or best interest?

[DecentDad]

Hi Soc,

Daughter has been joining my wife and I at synagogue regularly for better part of past couple years.  She appears to enjoy it, it's a very family-oriented place with special activities for the kids, "family night" services, etc.  She's been to 30 to 40 shabbat services, even singled out by the cantor one night as coming to so many.

If relevant, biomom stated in deposition that she encourages daughter's exposure to Judaism, saying it was important.  It was probably just lip-service, but there it is, in black and white.

In 2005, biomom suddenly announced desire to get daughter involved in Catholicism, biomom's own faith.

You may recall that we fought over school, and court ordered that biomom can pick the school at biomom's sole cost.  Biomom enrolled daughter in Catholic school, starting Fall 2005.

Biomom also had daughter baptized in June 2005, no notice to me.  I found out when daughter asked why I didn't come to it.

I had been expecting that daughter would be raised interfaith, and in my eyes, any exposure to judeo-christian upbringing can really only help establish good values.  That said, exposure her to Judaism is also important to me.

Daughter has recently been saying negative things about "Jewish people", which she attributes to biomom.  Daughter says that she only wants to be Catholic.  She's 5 years old.

I've accepted that daughter is going to Catholic school and will be somewhat immersed in it.  I've talked with teachers (in getting familiar with the school), who say that the school is tolerant of other faiths, that a third of the student body isn't Catholic.

If biomom is poisoning daughter against Judaism, it's arguably causing loyalty binds and conflicts for the child.  Not in best interest (nor very Christlike, but that's another line of commentary).

At the same time, biomom has freedom of speech and religion, so arguably can raise her child as she wishes.

1.  If this issue gets out of hand, does the court have authority to make an order akin to, "Dad won't bash Catholicism in front of child.  Mom won't bash Judasim in front of child."  ?

2.  Or would it be more likely that the court will merely assign decision-making about religion to one parent.

3.  And if #2 is likely, would you suppose that attending a Catholic school will carry more weight in the judge's eyes than who initially started what religion first?

Thanks,
DD

[socrateaser]

>1.  If this issue gets out of hand, does the court have
>authority to make an order akin to, "Dad won't bash
>Catholicism in front of child.  Mom won't bash Judasim in
>front of child."  ?

You probably already have a non-disparagement order in place (if someone bashes your beliefs, they are bashing you, also). But, you could ask for an express order. Trouble is, it's impossible to enforce, short of the other parent admitting that she disparages your religious beliefs on tape, before a neutral witness or on the record in some other manner.

>
>2.  Or would it be more likely that the court will merely
>assign decision-making about religion to one parent.

Definitely not. That would violate the 1st Amendment, as promoting or impairing one religion in favor of another.

>3.  And if #2 is likely, would you suppose that attending a
>Catholic school will carry more weight in the judge's eyes
>than who initially started what religion first?

I suggest that you offer the child some loving thoughts, i.e., people should learn about as many different beliefs as possible and then come to their own decision about what they wish to believe. Tell the child that there are people who don't follow either Daddy's or Mommy's religion, but that what's really important for someone of her age is that she follows the Golden Rule.

I'm not discounting the fact that many Christian denominations, including Roman Catholicism, would hold that failing to accept Christ as one's Savior is a ticket to eternal damnation. However, it is also a Roman Catholic tenet that a person who has no knowledge of Christ's ressurrection, will not be held to the same judgment as someone who has such knowledge. And, a very young child, such as yours, can hardly be said to have any real understanding/knowledge of Jesus or what his death and ressurrection is supposed to mean to those who do or do not accept him as Lord.

The real question here, however, is this: What would God/Jesus think about what Mommy is doing?

I doubt that the Creator would be pleased.

[DecentDad]

>The real question here, however, is this: What would God/Jesus
>think about what Mommy is doing?

Well, you previously advised that when it comes to best interest discretion, the judge IS God.

That's why I consulted you, not a rabbi.  :)

We had been exposing my daughter to much positive stuff about spirituality and traditions (including embracing what she's learning about Catholicism too), and she was really enjoying it.   Then biomom launched this new campaign, apparently, and so it's not as pure exploration as it had been for daughter.  Turned it into a right/wrong examination for her, rather than enjoying both.

Thanks very much for your advice.

[4honor]

because it is also your ancestral nationality?

And would BM's Jewish bashing be considered some form of bias against your child's ancestry?

Soc, Isn't teaching a child to hate themselves against their best interest?

[socrateaser]

>because it is also your ancestral nationality?

Nationality has nothing to do with being Jewish. There is only one rule: If you are issue of a Jewish mother, then you are a Jew. Otherwise, you're not a Jew, unless you voluntarily convert.

>And would BM's Jewish bashing be considered some form of bias
>against your child's ancestry?

Maybe, but private discrimination is not unlawful. Only discrimination by the government, or by private entities that accept government funding, is unlawful.

>
>Soc, Isn't teaching a child to hate themselves against their
>best interest?

Obviously so, but that's a tuff nut to prove. You'd need an expert witness to testify as to the child's mental state ($$$).