HOME   People do good because they are human, not because they are religious! 

Do not give God any credit for the good they do, they did it!


Demand and assert your right to sue your religion for teaching as fact what is not fact.

To let a religion distort facts in major matters and lie to people is to repudiate separation of Church and state. It is saying the Church should be given free rein to deceive and if that is allowed it should be allowed to steal and cheat as well. To deny the state the right to punish a religion for religious deceit is to repudiate secularism.

There should be legal frameworks set up to facilitate people who have been deceived and damaged by their religion so that they can sue their gurus. A child can be told that people who live together and are not married will go to Hell forever should they die. This can do grave damage if the child's beloved parents are living that way. Upon finding out that there is no evidence for Hell or that it is fictitious, the child should have the right to instigate a lawsuit against the Church.
Sexual abuse can do grave harm to the personality. Spiritual abuse can do this too. Religion itself says that spirituality is more important than anything else. This is virtually an admission that spiritual abuse is very serious.

When a religion is based on fraud, those who want to take it to court for taking their money and their time should have the right to do so. For example, if you buy a film saying the Quran is a miracle and you find that it is not you have been conned and are entitled to your money back at least. A religion could be based on a deliberate fraud or there could have been something wrong with the founders in which case it is a non-intentional fraud.
Theology degrees are not based on facts. Sue those who wasted your time and your money in this field of study.
Parents who make their babies members of a religion are responsible if the religion is damaging for their child. One should have the right to prosecute one's parents if her or his religion is untrue and harmful to one.
The suits would cripple the legal system so it is best to limit prosecutions to maybe five dissimilar and disturbing cases per year.

A religion can be sued for sexual abuse and other forms of abuse. The sooner a trend to highlight spiritual abuse starts the better.
Taking the Church to court for spiritual abuse when you were a child
If it is your choice to believe in religion then you need to hear the other side to make a choice. If is your parents choice for you to believe then they need to hear the other side to make a choice too. In reality, all you have is religion telling children and parents one side of the story and its always done in a watery way without the bad and vicious doctrines and the harm done by religion mentioned.
A child's mind is unfitted for investigating or checking the evidence for religion's claims. Children are impressionable and easily taken advantage of. They like magic which makes them susceptible to religious ideas. They depend on adults to teach them about the world and they look to adults to learn. The formation of key features of a person’s personality happens in childhood.
Some say that the religious indoctrination of children is not so bad when you consider how many parents raise their children to be models or top athletes or to have extraordinary academic prowess. That is a very poor argument for religious indoctrination! It argues that if religious indoctrination is bad, it is does not matter for there are other forms of bad indoctrination. Surely indoctrination should not happen in the first place? What kind of parent puts more effort into teaching a child the Hail Mary than that stealing is wrong? If we are going to indoctrinate then stick to indoctrinating civility.
If you suffered spiritual abuse from religion it may be right to sue your parents. Or you may sue the parish priest.
You should be able to sue the Church for requiring your parents to have you baptised and indoctrinated and/or you can sue the Church for baptising and indoctrinating you. Indoctrinated means that you are exposed to only one religious point of view and are encouraged or required not to doubt it. The Christian faith regards doubt as a very serious sin - it attacks faith and all the ideas built on it. If you doubt something God has said you automatically call everything else he has said into question. For example, Roman Catholicism says the worst fate possible is going to Hell to suffer forever. If you doubt the Church you must doubt that too and so are committing a serious sin for questioning such an important warning. You become as evil as a murderer in your heart if you doubt that murder is wrong. Doubting then would deserve Hell.
In 2014, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in Utah sued Winston Blackmore for calling his Church the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This caused trademark problems and led to donations meant for the Utah Church going to Blackmores. The only way the state can handle problems such as this is to work out which Church if any is the real Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. And the only way to decide that is to see if the doctrine is taught by proper authority. It is not true that the state should keep out of theological issues. It has to think about them at times. If children are raised in an entity claiming to be the Roman Catholic Church and it is not - the children have the right to sue. It is spiritual abuse to misuse religious labels.
Paedophiles think they are not hurting children by molesting them. No matter what they believe, they are still abusing the child. Most people seem to believe that if children are raised by religious parents to hate members of other religions and to want to kill them then that is child abuse. They will argue that parents who raise their children in a religion and insist that people outside that religion are to be put up with unless they can be eradicated or converted are likewise abusers. They are right. It is abuse no matter if the parents intend it to be for the best or not.
Indoctrination is spiritual abuse by default. It implies the child does not matter and the child's religious identity alone is what matters.


Christianity claims to be about the meaning of life. It claims a monopoly on telling you what life is for.
It claims that it is to help you see that you do not give your life meaning. You need light to see what the meaning is.
In the light of such claims, indoctrination must be understood as particularly cruel - unless Christianity really is the true religion.
Even atheists who rail against child indoctrination worry about giving a person the right to sue those who indoctrinated him or her. They hold that atheist parents may end up in court as well accused of indoctrinating.
To protect against abuse, only a selection of cases should be allowed to go forward to avoid opening the floodgates.
And also, the allegation should be well supported by testimony and be of an unusually serious nature. For example, if a picture of Hell is put up in your bedroom to remind you that you must not question the Church despite the affect it has on you. Or if you are beaten up for not going to Mass.


Here is a list showing how a Roman Catholic dogmatic upbringing amounts to child abuse.


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING Claims religious indoctrination is acceptable for children are indoctrinated anyway - for example, in geography at school


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Claims that religious indoctrination is wrong for it cannot be verified as geography can. Claims that accidental indoctrination is one thing but deliberate is another and is unacceptable. Claims that religious belief depends on indoctrination more than any other kind of instruction given to the child. Claims that it depends on wilful and deliberate indoctrination.


We know there is such a thing as subtle abuse. If religious indoctrination, even in a mild form, doesn't qualify then what does?


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING   It is child abuse not to indoctrinate your child against the errors of non-Christians. We must prepare the child for a merciful judgment and saying nothing means the child could grow up to die estranged from God and sentenced to everlasting torment


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Anybody can invent a religion that makes similar threats. Naturally the Christian has to teach that indoctrinating children is saving them from the everlasting torment of Hell. This definitely implies that raising a child as undecided or as an unbeliever is child abuse of the most horrific kind. Christianity slanders and rouses hatred against those who don't share its twisted views on raising children. Their doctrine of eternal torment in Hell certainly implies that the Law should not tolerate any indoctrination except their brand of religion.


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Lots of people claim that their religious upbringing never did them any harm and was good for them


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING But many disparage their religious indoctrination. Also it depends on the religion. A Buddhist indoctrinating a child will not do the same harm as a Fundamentalist Christian or Muslim indoctrinating a child will. It also depends on what the child is being told. A heretical Christian who teaches the child that you pick and choose what makes you feel good seems not to be indoctrinating but they are.  They are saying the faith is not worth taking seriously and you should lie that you can be a true Christian and that dishonest!


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  God is our friend and sends nobody to Hell and that there is no Hell for God is so forgiving will do no harm to the child.


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  But then the harm is being evaded because the Christian is really being her or his own religion and not a true Christian. Real Christians harm.


Indoctrination is bad. To say it is not as the dogmatists do, is simply to claim that the end justifies the means. The manipulation of children is wrong no matter how good the results are. The victims should be disturbed by it.


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  If children are not taught to believe what we believe, they will believe any rubbish. We abhor superstition.


It is true that many people get alienated from their religion and soon start looking to mediums and tarot cards to find meaning in life. They are merely exchanging one superstition for another. To a Protestant, Catholic miracles are superstition. To Catholics Islamic miracles are superstition. Miracles are not really any different from magic. Christians say that Jesus rising from the dead by God's power is a miracle. If a witch did it, they would be saying it was magic. They are being arbitrary. They are being superstitious.


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child must be baptised and made a member of the Church without his or her consent


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Consent is all important. The child will not feel, "I am better than Zainab next door for she was never baptised to put God's spirit in her" if he or she is not baptised. Religion collects people into a community that separates from other communities in the name of dogma - in this sense it is worse than racism. The person who separates from members of his own race will find it easy to start discriminating against and distancing from people of other races!


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Baptism turns the sinful child into a holy person

NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child doesn't have to pretend baptism made a difference. Catholicism should be sued for making claims about the supernatural power of baptism to make a person very good and holy and yet if you compare baptised and unbaptised people you see little difference. This is deliberate spiritual deception. The Church could be sued for the return of the baptismal fee or quackery.


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING   The child needs God

NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child does not - it does not have the fears than an adult has of suffering and death. A child can have fantasy friends if lonely. Nobody has the right to invent needs for other people. That is child abuse.


The child will be baptised and psychologically pressured into holy communion if necessary


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child is not initiated into any religion but encouraged to make her or his own decision later in life. Atheists should not force atheism on their children or indoctrinate them against religion


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child is told that the Roman Catholic religion is the only right one, the only reliable one


The child is taught about different religions and none. The child is encouraged to pick what he or she likes out of them provided it is helpful to her or him becoming a decent person. All pros and cons will be brought before the child. It should not be about making the child an atheist or anything. It should be about informing the child and supporting the child.


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child will be urged to thank God at meals and pray in accordance with the rules of the Church. 


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  There will be no pressure either way

DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The best child, at least potentially, is a Catholic child


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The best child is a child who is willing to learn and improve and to decide because he or she thinks about people before he or she thinks about God or religious rules or religious organisations


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child is taught that the rules of the Church and the commandments of God tell us how to behave


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The child is taught to understand why he or she must behave in a good way. If the child understands, the child will see guidance as loving and not as authoritarian and something to be rebelled against. If the child does wrong, he or she will feel that he or she can be a better person using his or her inner resources. Experiencing the confidence that comes from learning for yourself instead of being dictated to, the child gets a boost in the motivation to do better. A child that finds wisdom instead of other people trying to manipulate the child to have their ideas of wisdom has the self-confidence to overcome the failure.


The child may be tormented by thoughts of loved ones going to Hell to suffer forever at death. Religion is quite happy to teach the doctrine of Hell even to toddlers - Jesus said that everybody must be taught. His role and message are all about this Hell for he said he came to stop some people going to Hell. To not know it is to fail to understand him.


It would be impossible to put a child through that torment!


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  If a child grows up to reject the faith, we don't try to compel her or him to return. Therefore our indoctrinating children isn't wrong.


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Yes but what about now? You still take and seek an unfair advantage. The child can suffer grave trauma later in life as he or she tries to extricate himself or herself from the faith especially if that faith claims to be essential to genuine goodness and if it says people go to Hell if they leave it. Are you saying it is okay to do wrong to a child now for later he or she can get over it?


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING   You can commit a sin that deserves unending torment in Hell and this torment will start at death


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  You can't be that bad. Religion slanders you. It accuses you without proof. Sue it! You need absolute proof before you can accuse anybody of being capable of wallowing in hate and sin and evil in Hell for all eternity.


If you are undecided about whether or not there is such a fate, then you can't choose it. It is safer not to be a Christian! If you believe that murder is sometimes right, that belief will make it worse for you in court not less when you are on trial for murder. But that is because the law is dealing with a difficult situation and can't encourage people to believe murder is right. The Law would agree that if you commit murder really and sincerely believing that it is right it still has to regard you as a criminal and subject to a life sentence. It agrees you haven't chosen jail but you still have to endure it. You are treated as if you have chosen it. If you don't believe in an eternal Hell you cannot choose it. God doesn't need to put you in Hell as if he were a Criminal Court trying to make the best of a bad situation in an imperfect and flawed world. All he needs to do is keep you away from his saints in Heaven. So if you sin grievously and die, you are not trying to abandon God forever unless you believe you are! If there is a Hell, then the message of Jesus Christ is putting people in it!


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Loving God comes first and love your neighbour as yourself is secondary - this is what Jesus taught


NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  In other words, religion and belief in God are more important than you! Somebody failing to believe in God is worse than a baby dying of cancer. The child must spurn such notions. The child must see himself or herself as a special person and honour himself or herself accordingly and because he or she sees himself or herself as a gift he or she is keen to help others. Start with proper self-love not the love of God. The child will believe that if he or she does wrong, nobody should say the worst thing in it was how he or she offended God! That attitude promotes a lack of sensitivity to human suffering.


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  The fool says in his heart, "There is no God", none of them have done good none at all must be believed for God said it in scripture

NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  Atheists are or may not be fools and many of them are upright people. The Bible is inciting to hatred and the Church should be sued for saying such things.


The Church is provoking believers to anger against unbelievers and Christians who become unbelievers. If they can't be angry with us then they can never be angry! Presumably if a Christian lashes out it is the atheists fault for human nature can only take so much provocation!


DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  False religion does harm to children by indoctrinating, the true religion does not

NON-DOGMATIC UPBRINGING  All forms of religious indoctrinating of the child are manipulative. They are abusive in that sense. To tell a child that he must love God as much as Jesus said, that he has original sin, that people go to Hell at death if they don't believe or obey God, that God may hurt and kill people and that he must be very upset by any sin he sees is strong child abuse.