Dad: Court took my kids because I’m agnostic
- Kalinsaast
-
- Posts: 587
- Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:15 am
- Location: Halling UK
You might like:
Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:13 am » by Kalinsaast
A divorced Indiana father says he lost custody of his kids because he's agnostic.
Craig Scarberry had joint 50-50 custody of his three children with his ex-wife for four years, until a judge ruled last month that he was to be limited to four hours' visitation time per week and custody once every second weekend.
Scarberry says the only thing he can find in the ruling to justify the change is a superior court commissioner's comment that "the father did not participate in the same religious training as the mother ... father was agnostic." The ruling also stated that "when the father considered himself a Christian, the parties were able to communicate relatively effectively."
"I had never imposed my religious beliefs on my children. Matter of fact, our kids go to a Christian daycare, that when we had joint legal, I had to agree to it for the last three, four years," he told Fox 59 in Indianapolis.
The ruling has drawn the attention of Jennifer Drobac, an Indiana University family law professor, who told the Anderson, Indiana, Herald-Bulletin that the ruling may be a violation of Scarberry's First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
“I have read the order and am really concerned about why [the presiding court commissioner] twice mentioned [Scarberry’s] religious beliefs,” Drobac wrote to the Herald-Bulletin. “Such discretion would be clearly unconstitutional unless the parent’s religious practices were actually harming or posed a substantial threat of harm to the children.”
In an interview with MSNBC's Cenk Uygur, Scarberry explained that his agnosticism may have played a part in the ruling because the joint custody agreement had been based on the divorced couple's ability to "communicate effectively" about religion and other issues.
"In order to establish or keep joint legal custody with my ex, we have to be able to relatively communicate about things like education and religion, which is obviously important to her," Scarberry said.
Uygur seemed less than receptive to that argument. "I'm agnostic and I'm going to teach my kids to be agnostic. What business is that of the courts? I don't even understand why you have to justify it in court," he said.
"Craig, you're a lot more understanding of this than I am," Uygur said later in the interview. "If I was you I'd demand, in return, 'Hey, are you going to bring them to agnostic camp?' Have you made any demands for your beliefs? Isn't this is a giant constitutional issue? Don't you have the same rights as your wife?"
Scarberry said he plans to fight the order in court. He also said he is planning to protest in favor of religious rights outside his local government office on December 16.
The following video was broadcast on MSNBC.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/dad-court-kids-agnostic/
Craig Scarberry had joint 50-50 custody of his three children with his ex-wife for four years, until a judge ruled last month that he was to be limited to four hours' visitation time per week and custody once every second weekend.
Scarberry says the only thing he can find in the ruling to justify the change is a superior court commissioner's comment that "the father did not participate in the same religious training as the mother ... father was agnostic." The ruling also stated that "when the father considered himself a Christian, the parties were able to communicate relatively effectively."
"I had never imposed my religious beliefs on my children. Matter of fact, our kids go to a Christian daycare, that when we had joint legal, I had to agree to it for the last three, four years," he told Fox 59 in Indianapolis.
The ruling has drawn the attention of Jennifer Drobac, an Indiana University family law professor, who told the Anderson, Indiana, Herald-Bulletin that the ruling may be a violation of Scarberry's First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
“I have read the order and am really concerned about why [the presiding court commissioner] twice mentioned [Scarberry’s] religious beliefs,” Drobac wrote to the Herald-Bulletin. “Such discretion would be clearly unconstitutional unless the parent’s religious practices were actually harming or posed a substantial threat of harm to the children.”
In an interview with MSNBC's Cenk Uygur, Scarberry explained that his agnosticism may have played a part in the ruling because the joint custody agreement had been based on the divorced couple's ability to "communicate effectively" about religion and other issues.
"In order to establish or keep joint legal custody with my ex, we have to be able to relatively communicate about things like education and religion, which is obviously important to her," Scarberry said.
Uygur seemed less than receptive to that argument. "I'm agnostic and I'm going to teach my kids to be agnostic. What business is that of the courts? I don't even understand why you have to justify it in court," he said.
"Craig, you're a lot more understanding of this than I am," Uygur said later in the interview. "If I was you I'd demand, in return, 'Hey, are you going to bring them to agnostic camp?' Have you made any demands for your beliefs? Isn't this is a giant constitutional issue? Don't you have the same rights as your wife?"
Scarberry said he plans to fight the order in court. He also said he is planning to protest in favor of religious rights outside his local government office on December 16.
The following video was broadcast on MSNBC.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/dad-court-kids-agnostic/
"People spend all their lives worrying that something will happen to them. Eventually they end up in their final days of life. When suddenly they realize they've spent so much time worrying. They infact never lived at all". -Myself
Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:26 am » by Otomon
Agnosticism this days is just a fancy word to say "I don't know wtf to believe in"
It was a smart choice to limit the visits of the dad... he cant seem to make up his mind and the child needs stability.
It was a smart choice to limit the visits of the dad... he cant seem to make up his mind and the child needs stability.
Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:31 am » by Roadkill
They are divorced, seems neither one can make up their mind, plus stability at that point is out the window. Trust me I know. And maybe you should learn more information before you condone taking a child away from their father. Knucklehead.
Fri Dec 03, 2010 4:35 am » by Otomon
roadkill wrote:They are divorced, seems neither one can make up their mind, plus stability at that point is out the window. Trust me I know. And maybe you should learn more information before you condone taking a child away from their father. Knucklehead.
Knucklehead?
Jesus sucks cock?
Trust me I know????
Hey folks we got another 15 year old in the forum!!!
Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:09 am » by Aragajag
otomon wrote:roadkill wrote:They are divorced, seems neither one can make up their mind, plus stability at that point is out the window. Trust me I know. And maybe you should learn more information before you condone taking a child away from their father. Knucklehead.
Knucklehead?
Jesus sucks cock?
Trust me I know????
Hey folks we got another 15 year old in the forum!!!
Congrats your not the baby any more.
'Gee, I wish we had one of them Doomsday Machines, Stainsey..' General "Buck" Turgidson
Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:13 am » by Otomon
aragajag wrote:otomon wrote:roadkill wrote:They are divorced, seems neither one can make up their mind, plus stability at that point is out the window. Trust me I know. And maybe you should learn more information before you condone taking a child away from their father. Knucklehead.
Knucklehead?
Jesus sucks cock?
Trust me I know????
Hey folks we got another 15 year old in the forum!!!
Congrats your not the baby any more.
Why you talking shit brah?
-
- Related topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- Court Bans Man With Low IQ from Having Sex
by freeyourmindnow » Sat Feb 12, 2011 12:54 pm - 2 Replies
- 219 Views
- Last post by freeyourmindnow
Sat Feb 12, 2011 1:41 pm
- Court Bans Man With Low IQ from Having Sex
-
- MR burns in court
by truthseeker » Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:47 pm - 1 Replies
- 219 Views
- Last post by truthseeker
Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:02 pm
- MR burns in court
-
- SOMEBODY GOTS TO PAY FOR ME AND MY KIDS!!!
1 ... 7, 8, 9by spock » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:22 pm - 85 Replies
- 1942 Views
- Last post by allreadydead
Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:40 pm
- SOMEBODY GOTS TO PAY FOR ME AND MY KIDS!!!
-
- line up for your shots kids!
by dirtyrabbit » Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:08 am - 1 Replies
- 115 Views
- Last post by clawspiracy
Wed Jun 17, 2009 9:11 am
- line up for your shots kids!
-
- Kids see mum sniff 12 gas cans a day
1, 2by nickelson » Fri Jan 22, 2010 3:08 pm - 10 Replies
- 526 Views
- Last post by princessleia
Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:12 pm
- Kids see mum sniff 12 gas cans a day