This started out as a comic post from a court case. Alas, it’s become a morning ramble, with side-references to government faith- and marriage-policies, teacher’s unions, campaign financing, and (finally), the first Chicago mayoral race since 1989. Amazingly, these are actually related in a world hooked up to Internet, a global economic system that increasingly consolidates wealth in key decisionmakers, and these technologies dividing people into “haves” and “don’ts & won’ts” and blurring (linking..) government and religion, and the branches of government that in the U.S. were intentionally separated specifically so this would NOT happen.

Take it as a chat from a noncustodial mother who knows (another) Thanksgiving is upcoming with no anticipated contact with her children (now adults, or almost) and be Thankful I didn’t try empty the full contents of my heart about “how could these things be?” and “who has this society become?” onto the pages today.

Being female (?) or, being me, I noticed one-topic posts just don’t satisfy. This could’ve been a one-topic post, but the fun part of thinking is weaving at least 2 to 3 ideas together in unique ways. I tend to “braid.”

If you don’t, and want the main point, go to the bottom strand. The front two are usually added later as I think about the topic and try to add some layers of thought/relevance into the mix.

(1) Longwinded intro:

(early 1990s)…

Wife, becoming fundamentalist Christian, forgets I Corinthians 7:10ff,** awakens to the reality that her Jewish husband is going to hell. Husband, perhaps responding in kind converts to orthodox Judaism.

**This links to an entire chapter, with hyperlinks to every word to show a Greek link. Atheists and secular humanists should read to appreciate the dilemma of any “true believers,” in marrying — or for that matter — separating. The context in which it was set, to my understanding, was a culture not that different from ours in any fairly international, port city. The same group had already been confronted on incest (a man with his father’s wife), schisms, and apparently this was the big chapter on sex (with non-relatives….) which culturally was intrinsic to the worship service. Ain’t much new under the sun.

Put it together with the stipulation in another book, same author, that relegates forbidding to marry as a doctrine of the devil [but “Catholicism” is the universal church] , but celibacy is only if a man gets it from God as a gift, and marriage is not for the welfare of society, but so one doesn’t “burn.” Whether this is in hell, or from simple lust, isn’t unclear, but either way, it sounds like a “using” relationship as to the woman. All in all, for anyone who takes this all literally, and not with a grain of salt or metaphorically, it presents some mental challenges. Hence, the weak of heart, mind, or understanding might want to convert, take the beginner’s easy way out, and say your spouse is going to hell because s/he believes differently, thus at least temporarily solving YOUR existential/mental dilemma, if not your kids’ or your society’s…

Those who haven’t hung around Bible folks much (obviously, I’m not in this category) may sometime appreciate the suspension-of-reality factor is a real thing. Imagination and re-naming of reality is absolutely to humanity.

In a religious system which labels the world as F–‘ed up because of fallen human nature (i.e., not only maybe BEGAn with a big bang, but also will end in one, likely man or God-made, same difference essentially) ongoing, and while it’s NO excuse for abuse, it MAY explain why when individuals approach true believers with conflicting legal standards — such as, women do NOT exist to be used by men, in OUR culture, marriage, and child-birth, are to happen later, and no, it is not right to kill or threaten to kill your wife for committing adultery, or even if you think she did — or, if she gets too uppity.

One theory I have is that to function in two worlds simultaneously creates a constant tension between perceived and believed reality. Artists I know understand this, and have found ways to express it. This tension cannot and SHOULD not be eradicated, or creativity and the urge to invent, persist, or sometimes even WORK, leaves. The same total discrepancy exists between laws, in our country, and practice.

In the short case below (about which I know nothing more than is posted), it’s likely that the summary exaggerates the wife’s view (though not impossible) and the guardian ad litem asserts, with the court, that conflict hurts kids — they cannot handle religious diversity in the family, and will have a psychiatric breakdown if it continues. Therefore, they get only ONE majjor religion to be raised in, and with this, accept intolerance.

And like I’m saying — by “religion” and promising heaven while delivering (or delegating others to) hell, can be done by marriage, religion, or government operatives with equal facility and ease. It’s really a language/labeling thing.

Over the years, of exposure to both marriage, religions, and government agencies, initiatives, and operatives in all three categories, I think it’s reasonable to extrapolate that all men, and women, are innately liars. Therefore, it’s better to limit authority of one over the other; including of any single group over any other single group, by any profile whatsoever. Balance is better.

Generally speaking, thus, no matter what is systematically said, the opposite is going to be practiced. For example, “Social Services” means “Systematic Exploitation.” “I do” has a statistically about 50% chance of being followed through with, however sincere initially. As survival in our society becomes less and less natural behavior, we have less and less ability to actually know our own communities, neighbors, friends, and lovers in an environment NOT pronounced upon or defined by, well, someone else.

When this comes to religion, therefore, the general rule is that, while bringing in recruits by promising them heaven — the general reality is delivering hell to others. (I’m allowed to say this — I believe in
God, and can testify as to some of the hell delivered in name of Him, and because of my gender, personally).

I also believe that true atheism is a theory — rarely practiced. You gotta serve SOMETHING, or dedicate yourself to SOMETHING in life. If that something doesn’t match the pre-set religions, the quality of worship and focus is and seeking meaning in life is part of the human condition once basic survival needs are met, and helps in the seeking to meet them for those struggling with it.

The Jewish/Catholic situation sounds like a great match to me. But they had kids, and having kids does face people to actually make some decisions they can slide out of themselves, when beady-eyed dependent crying and pooping (regularly!) intelligent-question-askers move in, full-time, permanent (almost), nonincome-producing roomates that they are…These questions get asked often enough before speech sets in…Policies of some sort generally have to get set in order to get things done.

(I happen to know what looks like a good pair where Dad is a stay-at-home Jewish father, and mother, as I recall obviously not a stay-at home mother, and a Catholic, and kids go to a cooperative). I had many reasonable conversations with him indicating he had a good sense of himself, and of the communities we lived in.

One day in particular, this conversation was followed by a woman coming in from the local, nondenominational Protestant church (prominent in the community). She was about my age, heavily made up, svelte, and in a panic to get arts & crafts materials for a daughter’s project, attempted to engage me in a conversation about who alienated teenagers are (no, I didn’t identify…) and shared that her church was running classes on “how to be a woman.” She was obviously female as much as the pony-tailed stay at home Dad I’d just conversed with was obviously male. She had children, had a degree and a technical profession — and was submitting to church indoctrination as to how (not) be herself. Such is religion, folks! You WILL be defined, and whatever you are, must change into something else — like us — otherwise, you will be spat out, and labeled. Go find another group you more closely resemble.

But the days of tolerance are going away at least in this country, and people must take a stand either for or against religion, abortion, same-sex marriages, food-additives, welfare state or back to the plantation state, for or against national sovereignty, and under all this, we have a Democrat U.S. President raised Muslim, converted to Christianity, who seems to have taken Bush’s Initiatives to a whole new level, at least as deduced by $$ invested and rhetoric heard. I have a personal sense that for all this wonderful variety within our President and First lady, the institutions they run are becoming more and more authoritarian, intolerant, and dogmatic. Perhaps this is just an emotional pendulum our country is in labor (contractions) with.

Anyhow,

(2) Speaking of religion and marriage and government theory:

Prior to the dual conversions, they had three children, this 1990s case naturally provides business for a guardian ad litem and comic relief for me in this field.

How do you know when it’s time to stop using federal $$ (lots of them!) to push marriage because it’s good for them?

Answer: When the law of reverse efforts begins to set in:

• Maybe file this case under: “The Three Faith Factors”

2002 Article by John J. DiIullio, Jr.: “John J. DiIulio Jr. is the Frederic Fox Leadership Professor of Politics, Religion and Civil Society and Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania. Previously, he was the first director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives under President George W. Bush from early 2001 to August 2001.”

Wow — apparently that didn’t work out too well. However, like what appears to be many in (and out) of government posts, they simply move over to a related institute, for example, Brookings, where the next year he wrote “The Three Faith Factors.”   Hmm — what could they be?

Judaism, Christianity, Islam — no, despite certain longstanding wars among the three.
Catholicism, mainline Protestants, Mega-evangelical churches? — no.  No, it says “factors.”  Someone is breaking down a “product” into the factors that comprised it.   a X b X c = DESIRED STATE OF HUMANITY.

More to the point, the Three Faith Factors are about:

But what types of religious influences are most beneficial to the individual and society? At least three separate but related faith factors can be identified-what I will call “organic religion,” “programmatic religion,” and “ecological religion.”

“Organic, Programmatic, and Ecological.”  I knew that …..

Yep, the never-ending quest for the perfect equation to make the perfect society.  Or, a former Faith-based Initiative appointee to continue in an advisory capacity to maintain a marketable niche & voice.

That was published one year after he was fired or quit (are there other options?) the (in)famous White House Office on Faith-Based Initiatives. The topic of this particular article was — like so much of what the White House Offices, now headed by Czars (a comforting concept, eh?) do — is how to research — and reform — and restructure–  populations the researchers now (at least) have absolutely nothing in common with, whether or not they at one time did. In this case — religion is examined for its impact on the general health — especially urban youth in high-crime areas. (Do I need to add “black” or is this already implicit?):

Under what, if any, conditions does religion help to improve the lives of disadvantaged urban children and families, and how, if at all, can we [we WHO?] foster those conditions? Is there any significant body of evidence to suggest that religion reduces crime and delinquency among low-income, inner-city youth?

Photo of author at link above.

(see, I told you, there is no emphasis in these circles on white-collar, high-income, suburban or gated community crimes, or in examining what type of religious or areligious influences helped create inner cities and low-income areas which the idle? rich seem ever interested in analyzing…)

What religion is this smart guy from? Well, I’m going to hazard a guess, “Catholicism” based on his writing 7 years later for America, a Catholic magazine, and having written “Slowing the Exodus” (funny phrase for a religion famous for persecuting the Jews):

A national survey in 2008 by the Pew Forum got America’s Catholic clergy and lay leaders talking. It found that a third of Americans who were raised Catholic had left the church. One in 10 Americans was an ex-Catholic. Ex-Catholics outnumbered converts to Catholicism four to one.

In March 2009 the national American Religious Identification Survey found that between 1990 and 2008* the church’s flock fell from 26.2 percent to 25.1 percent of the total U.S. population, even though roughly half of all immigrants to the United States were Catholic.

*including the couple that inspired this post, below…

The March 2008 Pew survey also found that only 41 percent of all Catholics attend Mass weekly; only 57 percent consider religion important in their lives; only 44 percent believe that abortion should be prohibited in most or all cases; and only 35 percent oppose the death penalty.

Ex-Catholics and lapsed Catholics are a twin reality that cannot be attributed simply to changes in American culture. Many Americans now favor self-styled “spirituality” over “religion.” Old, religion-rooted moral codes are often mocked or worse by the nation’s secular elites.

Still, from sea to shining sea, over the last few decades many Protestant evangelical and Pentecostal churches have boomed with new members, new ministries, new megachurches and new multimedia outlets that reach millions here and abroad.

Yes, the power of the Internet and forcible, or implictly forcible electronic transfer of wealth is amazing, isn’t it? Possibly these churches learned something from the IRS.

Cathedral-building American Catholics used to know how to do all that, and more. Despite anti-Catholic laws and a hostile culture featuring Know Nothings, 19th- and early 20th-century Catholic leaders created America’s parish-anchored religious communities.

Well, no longer being in his Bush-appointed White House Office, he can come out. But, per a 2007 book (on author credit to this May 2009 article), he is centrist: ”

John J. DiIulio Jr. is the author of Godly Republic: A Centrist Blueprint for America’s Faith-Based Future (University of California Press, 2007).

Wife, becoming fundamentalist Christian, forgets I Corinthians 7:10ff, realizes her husband is going to hell. Husband, responding? converts to Orthodox Judaism.

How do you know when it’s time to stop using faith-based initiatives to push marriage?

Answer: When the law of reverse efforts begins to set in:

(3) Go figure….

Don’t ask how I found the case — just enjoy the comic relief. Well, not for the husband, wife, or kids……

Rarely do we get such straightforward commentary:

Kendall v. Kendall, 426 Mass. 238, 687 N.E.2d 1228 (Mass. 1997).

NATURE OF THE CASE: This family law case involved an appeal from a judgment of divorce nisi.

FACTS: Jeffrey Kendall (H) was Jewish and Barbara Kendall was Catholic. They married in 1988 and had three children and agreed that their children would be brought up in the Jewish faith. In 1991 W joined a fundamentalist Christian church that taught that anyone who did not accept its views would be damned to hell. H adopted Orthodox Judaism in 1994.

W filed for divorce based on an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. A guardian ad litem was appointed to assess the religious conflicts between H and W and their effect upon the children. The resulting divorce decree contained restrictions upon religious exposure ordering that neither parent could use their religious beliefs to alienate the children from the other parent. W was granted custody and H appealed the terms of the divorce order.

RULE OF LAW: There must be a finding of substantial harm to a child by clear and convincing evidence before a court may restrict religious indoctrination by parents of different persuasions.

HOLDING AND DECISION: Under these facts the report by the Guardian ad litem more than justified the court’s finding of substantial harm and supports the order that the court issued regarding the religious indoctrination of the children. A court need not wait for a formal psychiatric breakdown of a child to determine that the burden of proof in a finding of substantial harm has been met.

The burden of proof has been met if the evidence paints a strong picture of the reasonably projected course if the children continue to be caught in the cross fire of their parents’ religious differences. The guardian ad litem’s report clearly demonstrates the course that H and W had put their children on. We reject the claim that this decree burdens H’s right to practice religion under the free exercise clause. There was clearly substantial demonstrable evidence of the development of serious conflicts for these children.

DISPOSITION: Affirmed.
Related posts

Moss v. Superior Court – Failure to Pay Child Support – Contempt
deCastro v. deCastro – Divorce – Division of Marital Property
Wolfe v. Wolfe – Annulment of Marriage Based on Fraud

Written by Nymatlaw

July 7th, 2009

Copyright Nymatlaw All Rights Reserved

Thank you, Nymatlaw, whoever you are!

Where there are children, there are GOING to be language — and real — wars over (1) whose they are and (2) who gets to raise them and (3) what is hate (bullying) and (4) what is love. If two parents stayed together and had a religious conflict with the school system, or government, with a religious basis, they would be forced to choose — particularly if their lifestyles depended upon children’s enrollment in so-called “public” schools. While I won’t provide all links for this (one can look it up easily — but I can’t because my laptop is so slow) it’s commonly known that the Teachers’ Unions in any state are a financial and political force to be reckoned with. One cannot go far without doing so:

Life in this world involves serious cross-fire, almost anywhere, between conflicting ideologies about who owns whom, especially if one is a child. Moreover, even adults are now being regularly groped at airports — in THEIR best interests — if they object to full-body scans. This is occurring in the same country where, about a year go, a teenaged girl at a homecoming dance somehow got plied with alcohol, not only groped, but also gangraped (Richmond, CA). The dance was supervised and she had a father. She was found, half-naked, UNDER a picnic table, her back covered with scratches and her face with vomit, says a police officer, testifying of how her attackers scattered when he was finally called to the scene. Think about this as you continue reading below about asking for MORE money for these schools that sort families by wealth & race.

(4)  How we PAY our public educators to buy a market share  / maintain their status quo, and national workforce structure also:

From “OpenEye” — only 1 out of 2 prime organizations, 2008 election, Illinois Only:

National Education Assn: All Recipients

Among Federal Candidates, 2008 Cycle

Total: $2,212,532
Source of Funds:
Individuals PACs
Party Split:
Dems Repubs

• Filter by State:

  All states Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Name	Office	Total Contributions
Obama, Barack (D-IL)	Senate	$86,862
Kirk, Mark (R-IL)	House	$14,000
Durbin, Dick (D-IL)	Senate	$13,050
Bean, Melissa (D-IL)	House	$10,000
Biggert, Judy (R-IL)	House	$10,000
Davis, Danny K (D-IL)	House	$10,000
Hare, Phil (D-IL)	House	$10,000
Jackson, Jesse Jr (D-IL)	House	$10,000
Schock, Aaron (R-IL)	House	$10,000
Morgenthaler, Jill (D-IL)	House	$5,600
Emanuel, Rahm (D-IL)	House	$5,000
Foster, Bill (D-IL)	House	$5,000
Halvorson, Deborah (D-IL)	House	$5,000
Schakowsky, Jan (D-IL)	House	$4,000
Johnson, Timothy V (R-IL)	House	$3,000
Shimkus, John M (R-IL)	House	$3,000
Rush, Bobby L (D-IL)	House	$2,500
Costello, Jerry F (D-IL)	House	$1,500
Gutierrez, Luis V (D-IL)	House	$1,500
Lipinski, Daniel (D-IL)	House	$1,500

METHODOLOGY: The numbers on this page are based on contributions from PACs and individuals giving $200 or more. All donations were made during the 2008 election cycle and were released by the Federal Election Commission.

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics.