Comment 48 by Layla

I don't think it is quite as sinister as you portray it as with an evil priest condemning babies to hell and anxious parents quickly handing over their babies to be cleansed.

Fine, the priests aren't evil, but some of the words coming out of their mouths are, and the men that came up with the notion that babies are born with inherited “sin” certainly were very evil indeed. Sinful babies! It seems odd that perpetuating their nauseating ideology in any way is anyone’s idea of a nice family event, but I guess that's their business, except there’s usually children present, and then you don’t have that luxury. There may be a time and a place for children to learn about how some of mankind’s sickest minds perverted morality, but it should never happen like this, with a room full of adults seemingly condoning the idea. That needs to be handled with a lot more care. The concept of original sin is not something you just mention in passing. It needs to be omitted entirely if baptism can be said to be anything less than sinister. (Maybe the Church of England is doing that, I can’t be sure.)

I don't think the Church of England is particularly immoral. I think its beliefs make no sense whatsoever but I think it's mainly populated by well-meaning, harmless people and I don't see it as a force for evil in the world.

Right, there’s the disagreement then. I believe they’re all extremely immoral, because they’re all in the business of indoctrinating children, crippling their ability for rational thought even before they can properly begin to develop it. That is mental child abuse. And also, because they all advocate the idea of vicarious redemption, the idea that you can be absolved of your responsibilities through the torture and murder of an innocent person. It’s so obviously evil and depraved, it’s hard to understand how anyone who’s not already indoctrinated can’t see it and won’t make an effort not to be associated with any sort of church in any way.