I don’t think many 12 yr. olds go to hell, esp. sweet little jewish boys (Isn’t he a cutie-pie?). Actually, I don’t think there is a hell.
The baptists didn’t attack the boy as much as they did the parents and their beliefs. They interferred in the parents rights to raise the kid as they see fit. I’m glad that the parents appearantly prevailed.
If 20/20 reported the incident (and others like it) in the way many of you wish, you wouldn’t watch. Right?
Peace,
mangeorge
I agree with mangeorge. It wasn’t the fact they tried to ‘save’ him that I disagreed with per se. It was the fact that they undermined his parents authority and parental skills, and insulted their belief system.
But if they honestly belive that his parents beliefs will send the boy to hell, isn’t interfering with their authority in raising the boy the lesser of two evils, at least from their point of view.
-i have the worlds largest collection of seashells. i keep it scattered around the beaches
of the world…perhaps you’ve seen it?
I can just see it now: A poster hangs on the wall of a Southern Baptist church, prominently displayed for the whole congregation to see. Pictured on the poster is just the cutest little boy in the world, smiling up at the onlookers. The caption reads, “What if this cute little boy died tomorrow and got tortured for all eternity in hell?”, below which is a longer sermon in small type about how God has condemned everyone who isn’t a Southern Baptist to an eternity in the Lake of Fire, and how if you let this happen to this cute little boy it’s all your fault.
Emustrangler said:
This is the kind of logic that ends up with people murdering doctors who perform abortions, because that’s the “lesser of two evils.”
As much as I respect others’ peoples faith, I can’t see how it’s compassionate to treat everyone else’s beliefs like a one-way ticket to hell.
A few people here have blasted the Baptists for taking this to the media. I was under the impression that it was the boy’s parents that made a stink when they found out, not the Baptists. Am I wrong?
Also, one thing that hasn’t been mentioned is that I thought the boy seemed pretty bright. I was impressed. He said that the experience had given him a better appreciation of his heritage. It’s good to see that there are still intelligent young people in the world.
Wow. . .I guess I’m one of few who don’t think the church was really out of line. It didn’t sound to me as if the kid was pressured into anything: His friend asked him to go to a youth meeting, he went, (presumably) had a good time, was told (truthfully) that Jesus could wash away his sins, and he made a decision. Granted, HE should’ve thought it over and talked with his parents, but I don’t think the CHURCH did anything wrong (except telling him he could be BOTH Jewish AND Baptist, I don’t get that).
This is YOUR opinion. If you share it with me, I have the maturity to accept it or to debate it or to reject it. A 12 year old boy, no matter how bright, usually does not have the individual strength of character to resist group peer pressure or the life expierence to reject or accept what is simply anther person’s individual statement of belief ( not fact ) based on logic and personal expierence. How would you feel if a Satanist “forced” your child to make a scarifice because of what (to him) is a truthful belief in his higher power?
I KNEW that was going to happen. OK, let me rephrase a bit. He was told (truthfully, in my, and more importantly the people’s he was told by, opinion) . . . In other words, they were giving him what they believe is the truth. They weren’t messing around with the kid, they really wanted to show him the way.
When I was 12 (I remember, because it was only 4 years ago), I could tell when people were feeding me a load of crap. I could make intelligent decisions. I think most twelve year olds can understand the basics of a religion. If the kid didn’t understand something, he should have asked. I do not think he was forced into it, like I said, I think he went, enjoyed himself, heard something that interested him, and made a decision ON HIS OWN. I also think that he went home, told his parents about it ("Hey Mom! Guess what? I went to that church, and they told me that there was this man, Jesus, and they said he could take away all my sins! Mom, all these people were so into it and I felt something when they were singing, and they told me all about it and it sounded like a really good deal and I just had to pray about it and sign this little paper, and then I could feel God come into me!!! It was so great!!)they got upset (“WHAT!?!?!?!?”), and he immediately changed the story a bit to make it SOUND as if he was forced into it (“Uuhh. . .well they were singing and they were telling me that I was going to Hell and that I would be tortured for all eternity and this guy grabbed me and set me down at this table and he said if I didn’t sign the paper, I’d go to Hell forever and he said I’d be making a big mistake, I didn’t know what to do. . .sob. . .sob”).
I’m not Baptist either, I just don’t think they did anything wrong.
**
("Hey Mom! Guess what? I went to that church, and they told me that there was this man, Jesus, and they said he could take away all my sins! Mom, all these people were so into it and I felt something when they were singing, and they told me all about it and it sounded like a really good deal and I just had to pray about it and sign this little paper, and then I could feel God come into me!!! It was so great!!)they got upset (“WHAT!?!?!?!?”)
**
You can only realistically take the details of the story and examine them. Making details up is unwise, especially when it’s just a way to force the story to fit your beliefs.
Personally, I think what they did was unethical, not because of what they did to the kid, but how they did it. They made a horrible example of their own religion. Isn’t the Baptist church one of those that ask “WWJD?” What would Jesus have done in this instance? Would he lie to a little boy to get his worship? I sincerely doubt it. If you believe that your religion is so just and right, then you should never have to stoop to choosing any evil, even the lesser one.
There are so many ways that the Baptists could have handled the situation, yet they chose to lie.
Garfield said:(bolding mine)
Please note, Garfield, that what you think is in no way a reflection of what actually happened. Now, I don’t know what happened either. You are projecting your opinions onto the situation because the situation happens to mesh quite nicely with what you believe. This is a fine and dandy way to live your life. It is not, however, an effective tool for use in a debateing forum, which GD is. What most of us here are saying is that it is wrong to indoctrinate children against the wishes of their parents. In this country, it is Ok to be Jewish. It’s peachy if your are a Muslem. We get a warm and fuzzy feeling when you tell us that you are Christiam, Mormon, Jehova’s Witness or Athiest. What we do not condone is when one group tries to asert it’s “rights” at the expense of another. As an adult, it’s one of the prices we pay to live in a society that recognizes the right of all religions to exist. Once in a while you run into some evangelizing nut( for whatever belief). You tolerate him because you cherish freedom. What Is absolutely wrong is to take a child raised by parents of a different religion and tell him that he is wrong. Parents have the right to raise children, and teach them whatever belief they choose. You do not have the right to challenge this teaching until the child is of age. ( Out of respect for what seems to be an intellegent young poster, I’ll allow 16).
Garfield said:
You just don’t see it, do you? Don’t you think that “showing him the way” should be entrusted to somebody other than a group of strangers – at least at his age?
The point is that they had no right to “show him the way.” They were, indeed, “messing around with the kid.”
Tell me, how would you like an atheist organization to start grabbing some church kids off the street, making them feel at home, and talking to them about how there is no God and their parents are lying to them and teaching them bullshit?
Or maybe some Wiccans could invite them over for a pagan festival. Or maybe some Satanists could preach to them about living for the moment and not worrying about all that god stuff.
Or maybe, just maybe, we should let parents and family teach their children about religion, at least until they’re old enough to explore for themselves.
They weren’t “showing him the way”. They were showing him THEIR way, which is arrogant and presumptious in the extreme.
I agree with DavidB wholeheartedly. Those people would give birth to kittens if someone from a “hell-bound” faith had converted their child.
WWJD? I dunno . . . he was a Jew.
Beaker:
How did they lie to the kid??? (If you are saying that their core beliefs are lies and telling him Jesus is God’s son is lying to him, OK, I understand. I don’t agree, but I understand. If that’s not what you are saying, what are you saying?)
Everyone else (making sure I get your point):
You are saying that these people should not try to tell people under a certain age about what they have found and share it with them. Right? They should just ignore them? What if they ask? When is the “legal age” when I can talk to a kid about God?
[quote]
You are saying that these people should not try to tell people under a certain age about what they have found and share it with them. Right?
Right. Frankly, it’s none of your buisness what the kid believes. Leave his religious training to the people that’s responsible for it-- his parents.
If the kid asks what your beliefs are, go ahead an tell them, but it’s not youir place to convert them. Once he or she is an adult, go for it.
Why do you feel you have to in the first place?
Okay 20/20 was doing it’s job. Bending facts, glossing over parts, stretching the truth, et al. It’s television. They call it a medium cause nothing is well done. (Mr. Griffin, I believe).
The SBC’ers were doing there part, worried about the kid, laid out things, he signed a peice of paper. Then the SBC crows about it, 20/20 picks it up in its eternal crusade to remove religion from American life. (that includes YOUR religion, too!)
(sigh) let’s debate the first problem. Someone trusted the media to do a fair job. BS.
According to the kid himself, they said anyone who was interested should stay after the thing was over, and someone would talk to them. He was interested, he stayed. That does not qualify as asking (or inquiring)? It doesn’t sound to me as if they forced him into anything. HE made the CONCIOUS decision to stay and learn more. THE KID MADE HIS OWN DECISION. He also made his own decision to go to the church activity in the first place (I believe he did know it WAS a church activity).
Also. . .I apologize for all this:
I would like to note that I did say “I think” at the beginning, but it was still inappropriate and I do apologize.
**
Beaker:
How did they lie to the kid??? (If you are saying that their core beliefs are lies and telling him Jesus is God’s son is lying to him, OK, I understand. I don’t agree, but I understand. If that’s not what you are saying, what are you saying?)
**
By telling him that he could still be Jewish and accept Jesus Christ. I’m also bothered that they didn’t let him know the true purpose of the activity. They may not have outright lied about the activity, but it appears to me to be a lie of ommission.
I agree with you on the Jewish thing, I didn’t think you were referring to that, but I agree.