While we have the country in a buzz over “activist judges” let’s take a look at the news out of Indiana. As happy as I am to see that the American justice system is part of the true melting pot of America and its many diverse cultures (How often do you hear about a Wiccan divorce?), I’d like to point out that this is the type of action that our right wing friends would love to see practiced every day in our country. For citizens who’s political ideology stems from the sacred protection of state’s rights, this is their goal for the federal courts with the crusade for the appointment of Bush’s controversial judges. Doesn’t that scare you?

I’ll point out myself that this is but an isolated case active only in a single state. The ruling from the court in Indiana is nothing more than a persuasive precedent to other sovereign courts throughout our nation. They can choose to ignore or accept the foundations of the judgement as they see fit. But let’s take a peek at the wording from that ruling that is the source of my concern:

In the order, the parents were “directed to take such steps as are needed to shelter Archer from involvement and observation of these non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals.” The judge let the wording stand.

How does a court justify labeling a religion that is practiced by millions as something that is unfit to be taught by a set of parents to their child in their legal custody? Maybe it’s just me, but it seems this judge has no problems saying “This child, who already attends Catholic school, must not be taught the religion of his family by his parents because it is not like the religions that we’re all used to, like the ones that worship ‘one god’ and not some hodge-podge of nature deities.” (I singled out ‘one god’ there because despite their monotheistic foundation, Christians still divide their god into three parts, making themselves in effect polytheistic)

The only redeeming quality in this story are the actions by one Micah Clark of the American Family Association of Indiana. Here’s someone who can look at this action, see the spirit in which it was made, and say “No, that’s not right. Labeling non-Christian religions as inferior and prohibiting parents from teaching them is wrong.” In my first article, I called on moderate Christians to exercise their faith truthfully and accurately in opposition to the factions that spread intolerance and injustice under the guise of religion. This is what I meant, right here, in the actions of Micah Clark. Now, if only this were the norm and not the exception, the world would be an amazingly different place where true freedom was permitted for all peoples, without interference from some “activist judge” from Indiana.