This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Malaysian Custody Dispute Lost Between Courts

Malaysian Custody Dispute Lost Between Courts - Comments

Peter Grant's Avatar Comment 1 by Peter Grant

Typical, no one asks the children what they want...

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:20:00 UTC | #456039

robzrob's Avatar Comment 2 by robzrob

insanity.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:22:00 UTC | #456040

gibodean's Avatar Comment 3 by gibodean

Umm, so to be a convert to a religion you don't even need to know anything about the religion, agree to it, or even to know that you've converted ? All you need is a parent to convert you ?

That is most certainly child abuse.

And different court systems depending on your religion ? What a farce.

Religion poisons everything.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:23:00 UTC | #456041

Bernard Hurley's Avatar Comment 4 by Bernard Hurley

This illustrates the danger of labelling children. This sort of thing has happened in the west.

In the days of the Papal States there were cases when children were forcibly taken away from their Jewish parents because a maid had baptised the child. This was justified by the RCC because of the "gross injustice" that the child, who now they considered as RC, would suffer if brought up by Jews.

More recently. At the end of WWII it emerged that various children of Jewish parents had been taken in by catholics and baptised. Pope Pius II instructed that, in cases where the parents had survived the holocaust, these children should not be returned to their parents. Many people were shocked and amazed by this, but actually he was merely following the traditional RC view. What was really amazing was that the French bishops ignored this and ensured, when they could, that these children were returned to their parents.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:29:00 UTC | #456044

sdando's Avatar Comment 5 by sdando

So this has always been my problem with places like this that have 2 systems of "justice". Sharia law only applies to Muslims but leaving leaving Islam is punishable by death under Sharia. Once a child is labeled Muslim they are subject to Sharia and therefore would be subject to the death penalty for leaving the faith even if they never chose to be in it in the first place.

It's insanity.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:31:00 UTC | #456047

PrimeNumbers's Avatar Comment 6 by PrimeNumbers

Just as alcohol is controlled for the under 18s, so should religion be.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:33:00 UTC | #456048

Ron Millam's Avatar Comment 7 by Ron Millam

Just one more example that all too often, religion has nothing to do with deities or worship. It's about power and having absolute control over the lives of others.

Religion is a horrible sickness. It should not be controlled -- it should be eliminated.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:35:00 UTC | #456066

Steven Mading's Avatar Comment 8 by Steven Mading

And of course another reason why labeling these children with the religion of their parents is morally wrong is the Koran's attitude about apostasy. If any of these children choose anything other than Islam once they reach the age to make that decision, be it the Hinduism of their mother, or Christianity, or Atheism or really pretty much anything that is not Islam, they will be incorrectly labelled as "apostates" and treated as such.

You're not an apostate unless you willingly made the choice to join the religion in the first place and actually believed it. Having other people with such terrible morals that they are willing to lie by CLAIMING on your behalf that you believed it just because claiming such helps their political power, absolutely does not count.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 14:41:00 UTC | #456085

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 9 by mordacious1

Simple...just cut the kids in halves, then...oh wait, too jewish.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 15:01:00 UTC | #456096

PERSON's Avatar Comment 10 by PERSON

"9. Comment #476673 by mordacious1 on April 5, 2010 at 4:01 pm"
Um, Solomon was having a laugh in 1 Kings 3:16-28 Though the prostitute who said she was fine with having a kid cut in half was giving the game away somewhat. Interesting that she wasn't really punished. Was the king suggesting such a thing not a big deal at the time? Probably not. Or perhaps she was just seen as too insignificant to write about; the story is to show how cool Solomon was after all.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 15:28:00 UTC | #456101

Bernard Hurley's Avatar Comment 11 by Bernard Hurley

Comment #476678 by PERSON

Interesting that she wasn't really punished.


Punished for what? If someone as wise as Solomon suggests cutting the kid in half, it must be an OK thing to want to do.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:01:00 UTC | #456109

Eventhorizon's Avatar Comment 12 by Eventhorizon

3 words ...you say tomato

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:23:00 UTC | #456113

Ron Millam's Avatar Comment 13 by Ron Millam

11. Comment #476686 by Bernard Hurley on April 5, 2010 at 5:01 pm
Comment #476678 by PERSON
Interesting that she wasn't really punished.

Punished for what?

True, she shouldn't be punished for agreeing with the king. However (and I could be wrong), the way I see it --
She COVETED the child (strike one);
She STOLE the child (strike two); and
She BORE FALSE WITNESS about the whole thing (strike three).

Three commandments broken with impunity. I guess the old-man-upstairs wasn't all that serious about those silly rules to begin with. I'm just sayin'.....

edited for punctuation

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:33:00 UTC | #456117

DeusExNihilum's Avatar Comment 14 by DeusExNihilum

"But nearly a year ago Ms. Gandhi was stunned to discover that her husband had converted to Islam."

How? How did her husband do this? Did he wave a magic wand? Did he put the Koran underneath their pillows? Did he sit them down and have a theological debate with them?

OR did he just say "You're not Hindu anymore, You're Muslim".

Hopefully the children will realize both parents are full of shit and reject both buckets of nonsense.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:56:00 UTC | #456122

Bernard Hurley's Avatar Comment 15 by Bernard Hurley

Comment #476694 by Ron Millam

She COVETED the child (strike one);
She STOLE the child (strike two); and
She BORE FALSE WITNESS about the whole thing (strike three).


Where does it say "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's child?". Besides, does God play baseball?

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:03:00 UTC | #456125

Gojira74's Avatar Comment 16 by Gojira74

Coming from a child who was indoctrinated from birth, it takes a long time to shed the fear that comes with that. At least if they end up with the Hindu mother, they can choose to relinquish it later in a much easier fashion.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:45:00 UTC | #456135

Luke_B's Avatar Comment 17 by Luke_B

So this has always been my problem with places like this that have 2 systems of "justice".


Couldn't agree with that more. How can there be two (or more) forms of justice? If we don't all live by the same rules then there is only injustice.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 18:25:00 UTC | #456150

gos's Avatar Comment 18 by gos

[S]aid Ms. Gandhi. “It’s not about religion. It’s about humankind. What does she know that she’s been converted?”


Indeed, as no-one here needs reminding about, children aren't Christian/Muslim/Hindu/whatever.

It's so obvious when you're talking about a religion that isn't your own.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 18:58:00 UTC | #456172

Ron Millam's Avatar Comment 19 by Ron Millam

15. Comment #476702 by Bernard Hurley on April 5, 2010 at 6:03 pm

Where does it say "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's child?". Besides, does God play baseball?

"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife or thy neighbor's ass or thy neighbor's wife's ass or anything that is thy neighbor's." (Damn - sometimes I hate how some of this shit from childhood seems to stick in my brain. I'm not sure that I remembered this exactly right.)

And maybe that invisible old man in the sky doesn't play ball, but if you believe the post-game interviews, he surely helps the winners win. (Odd that he never gets blamed for a loss -- "Jesus tripped me as I was rounding third and made us lose" isn't something you hear very often.)

I really seem to have strayed from the topic of the article at hand. Sorry.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 19:49:00 UTC | #456201

Bernard Hurley's Avatar Comment 20 by Bernard Hurley

Comment #476778 by Ron Millam

anything that is thy neighbor's


In the KJV both in Exodus 20:17 and in Deut. 5:21 it says "any thing" not "anything"; so it boils down to whether a child is a "thing" and, if so, whether that "thing" can be owned. Religious types would probably answer "yes" to both questions, which is partly what causes the problems in the article.

For the record, Jesus makes me loose my keys nearly every day.

Mon, 05 Apr 2010 22:40:00 UTC | #456258

William T. Dawkins's Avatar Comment 21 by William T. Dawkins

“I missed a lot of her childhood,” said Ms. Gandhi. “It’s not about religion. It’s about humankind. What does she know that she’s been converted?”


This statement shows that this mother, as well as any intelligent Mom, realizes that a child that young has no sense of religion. This reinforces the case against child indoctrination.

Tue, 06 Apr 2010 04:47:00 UTC | #456325

GBile's Avatar Comment 22 by GBile

.. children who are converted must study Islam at school and are subject to Shariah laws that state that Muslims cannot marry outside the faith, must raise their children as Muslims and cannot participate in non-Muslim religious ceremonies.


A fine example of the madness that is called religion.

Tue, 06 Apr 2010 09:17:00 UTC | #456357

Fyre13's Avatar Comment 23 by Fyre13

complete insanity

Tue, 06 Apr 2010 10:53:00 UTC | #456370