Mom loses custody case involving church with naked ritual

[SecularMotion]

An appeals court has ruled that a father rightfully was given custody of his children because of their mother’s role in a controversial church in which the minister held naked rituals with followers.

The ruling, issued Wednesday, followed a 2011 Tribune investigation of Light of the World Ministries and its pastor, Philip Livingston. The practices of the small Lake County church came under fire in a bitter custody dispute that centered on a ritual Livingston termed “light therapy.”

The ritual, according to court records, evolved to the point Livingston’s female followers got naked in the back room of a small house overlooking a lake in Wauconda where, in one-on-one sessions, Livingston got naked, inserted his fingers in their private areas and told them to touch his.

He claimed in court testimony that the “spiritual guidance” helped cure everything from drug addictions to yeast infections. One of his followers was the mother in the custody case, who testified she participated in the ritual.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-mom-loses-custody-case-involving-church-with-naked-ritual-20140724-story.html

[cbayer]

1. This "Reverend" Livingston is quite the charmer.

Here is just a bit about him. There is more at the link.

His first career as a concrete contractor ended in bankruptcy.

Over two decades, he or his companies were sued more than 30 times. Most cases stemmed from unpaid bills — he owed $60,000 in unpaid child support, $150,000 in back taxes and nearly $200,000 to other creditors. At one point he was arrested in a home repair fraud case, but the felony charge was dropped.

http://cultbustersgalactica.yuku.com/topic/982/LIGHT-WORLD-MINISTRIES-CULT-LUSTFUL-MIND-CONTROL-PREDA#.U9uCvxZsBBU

Religion or not? You decide.

Sounds like the judge made a good decision.

[Warren Stupidity]

49. I've heard that a placebo effect occurs with these rituals.

So you of course support digital-genital rituals, as you do exorcism, because of the "placebo effect". Right?

[ck4829]

2. And of course she's saying "But my RELIGIOUS FREEDOM is under attack!1!"

Ruth Bader Ginsburg said there would be a minefield, but I was sure it would not have involved naked rituals with underage kids and their parents... this quickly.

[cbayer]

3. She hasn't got a prayer.

This has nothing to do with her religious freedom, only about her fitness as a parent.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. Why are her religious beliefs any more ridiculous

than anyone else's?

If they're 'sincerely held beliefs' (and the Court has already said it's not their place to judge the sincerity of anyone's religious beliefs) why should she have her ability to be a parent taken away because of her religious beliefs?

Should she have incorporated?

[cbayer]

5. I don't think they are religious. I think this is a cult.

In fact, the guy running this operation has been separating it from religion.

The kids aren't being taken away because of her religious beliefs. The kids are being taken away because she reportedly exposed them to situations where there was presumably some sexual acts performed on them or in their vicinity.

Those that want to make this about religion are as ridiculous as she is.

[mountain grammy]

7. In America today, "closely held religious beliefs" of corporations are allowed to

affect the lives of employees and everyone else, I find nearly everything about religion to be ridiculous.

[cbayer]

10. I'm certainly not going to defend the Citizens United decision or the recent Hobby Lobby

decision.

But this isn't about religious beliefs at all. It's about child endangerment.

[KurtNYC]

8. FYI, There are official religions that cut part of a baby's genitals off during a cerimony.

They give the 8-day-old baby wine, etc. but good luck winning a custody case on those grounds.

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/life/Life_Events/Newborn_Ceremonies/Liturgy_Ritual_and_Customs/For_Boys.shtml

The difference between a cult and a religion seems to be the number of followers they have.

[cbayer]

9. Yes, I am aware of that. Do you really want to make this about

circumcision?

There have been cases where a parent objected to circumcision and I think they have been ruled in favor of the disapproving parent. But in most cases, both parents agree, so there is really no similarity to this.

Do you think there might be some other differences between a cult and a religion? Is so, what might those differences be?

Apparently this judge was able to discern some differences.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

12. The difference between cults and religions?

Number of followers.

[cbayer]

17. That seems like a blunt blade, and I suspect you don't really think that.

But there are some pretty standard texts on what the difference is.

I will admit that it's often not easy, but one of the most critical differences is the presence of a single charismatic leader and a certain degree of secretiveness.

If it fits an agenda to call all religions cults, so be it, but there is a difference.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

23. I actually do think that.

I'm not an anti-evangelist, but I don't believe any sort of belief in the supernatural is valid.

Now certainly, various societally useful and ethical beliefs get tacked on to various religions over time, but none of those beliefs actually require the religious (supernatural) beliefs.

I'll be polite to religious people I meet, but I don't think any of their supernatural beliefs are any less delusional than those held by anti-vaxxers.

[cbayer]

24. I'm not sure what you mean by valid or who gets to determine whether

something is or is not.

I'm going to assume that you are using delusional in a colloquial and not technical sense. Certainly if you are a BSN you will know the difference and how inappropriate it would be to label religious believers as having a psychiatric disorder.

The big difference between religious beliefs and anti-vaxxers is that there is evidence that disputes the notions that anti-vaxxers put forward. There is not such evidence when it comes to theism. And anti-vaxxers don't invoke anything supernatural for their claims.

So this is not a very good comparison. But I guess it allows you to have two groups that you derisively dismiss and that you can probably feel superior to.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

31. Correct, I'm using the lay term there

not making a medical diagnosis.

My comparison with anti-vaxxers was about their beliefs, not the evidence that suggests their beliefs are incorrect. They believe in something for which no such proof exists, ditto the supernatural believers. There are certainly things that disprove various beliefs held by various religions as well, but believers will not accept those proofs either.

As to the central notion, that anything supernatural exists, no, there is (and can be no) proof of such. You can't prove a negative.

[cbayer]

32. But there is a big difference with the anti-vaxxers.

We have evidence that their beliefs are wrong. It's not just that they believe in something for which there is not proof, they believe in things which there is proof are untrue.

It's a very bad comparison, imo, but a great illustration of when I think it's ok to challenge someones beliefs. If you have evidence, then you are in a very good position. If you don't, you are out of line, imo.

And that goes for religion, too. Creationists should be challenged. There is clear evidence that they are just flat wrong. But there are no grounds for challenging a simple belief in god, because, as you say, there is no proof for existence or non-existence.

And you can prove a negative. That's just dogma.

[trotsky]

35. Unbelievable.

"I'm not sure what you mean by valid or who gets to determine whether something is or is not."

Post #5:
"I don't think they are religious. I think this is a cult."

No one else can determine, but apparently you can. Classic.

[Starboard Tack]

45. Precious!

Talking to the void

[rug]

42. The difference between an ignorant stement and an opinion?

Facts.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

44. Religions define cults in a way

that leaves themselves outside the definition. People that do things we don't consider 'real religions'? They're cults.

It's 'No True Scotsman'.

[rug]

48. Cults are more a matter of sociological definition than a religious one.

They can be categorized by their behavior and structure regardless of their tenets.

[eggplant]

13. And there a lot of atheistic/christian/whatever parents who circumcise as well.

Relating the practice of a medical procedure to sexual abuse is a bit disingenuous, don't you think?

[cbayer]

19. That's a really important point. Sometimes it has absolutely nothing to do with religion.

[KurtNYC]

20. It is not a "medical procedure" when it is perform in a ritual

with wine and scripture and not by a doctor.

From "magic underwear" to holes in sheets many religions ritualize sexuality so I don't disagree with the court's decision in this case but rather with idea that large religions are less inclined to control their followers sexuality than smaller ones.

Giving men with religious hierarchies control of one's body and sexuality is a bad idea and is not limited to cults.

[trotsky]

22. Yes, THIS:

Giving men with religious hierarchies control of one's body and sexuality is a bad idea and is not limited to cults.

[eggplant]

37. Giving *people* control of one's body and sexuality *can* be a bad idea.

Informed consent and all that. Bad situations can happen regardless of the gender of either person, or the underlying "excuse" for the behavior.

It *is* possible for people to embrace religion without terrible consequences ensuing, just as it is possible for terrible consequences happening to non-religious people for secular reasons.

[trotsky]

39. The underlying excuse that religion gives is the key difference.

"Because god says so."

Prove that wrong.

[eggplant]

36. You're flat out wrong.

It is a medical procedure, performed by people with proper medical training (moyels) who perform it with topical anesthesia, quickly and hygienically, in a manner to cause the least discomfort. That there is wine, prayer, and celebration involved doesn't make it any less of a "medical procedure". That there have been examples of moyels who do not follow safe procedure doesn't change this -- there are bad doctors out there too.

My brother is a neonatologist in the Midwest, and performs non-ritualistic circs in the hospital and also does circs as a moyel. Explain to me how the two things are different.

You are veering far off course from the OP. Your agreement or disagreement with various religious practices notwithstanding, circumcision is not strictly a religious practice. Stop conflating the two things.

Oh, and Judaism is matriarchal, btw.

[KurtNYC]

38. What acute medical problem does ritualized circumcision allegedly treat?

And yes, let's go back to the OP now:

“When a parent puts his/her children in a social setting with naked adults, and encourages his (or her) daughter to receive therapy from a man who sometimes, in the course of therapy, digitally penetrates the vaginas of the recipients of his therapy, the evidence sufficiently supports a finding that the parent exposed his/her children to an injurious environment,” according to the synopsis published by the First District Appellate Court.

Digital penetration of the vagina when done by a licensed gynecologist in the standard practice of medical treatment for an acute condition or preventative care is not sexual abuse so the Court, in this case, ruled that religions who "play doctor" are "an injurious environment" for children and I absolutely agree.

[eggplant]

46. Wow, that's quite a stretch.

The guy from the news story isn't performing a medical activity, he's being a perv. We all seem to be in agreement on that part.

However, a moyel performs a very specific surgical procedure that is recognized to follow accepted medical practice, and only after proper training. A moyel isn't "playing doctor" - in this specific instance, they are acting as a medical professional.

Again, you seem to have a problem treating "ritualized circumcision" and "circumcision" as being equal, despite the reality that the two are procedurally the same, with the same end goal. In both cases, the parents choose to have the procedure performed, and provide informed consent. The rationale for a parent to choose to have this done does not have to exclusively be ritual or medical. It can be both.

[Gore1FL]

16. The difference between a cult and a religion:

In a cult there is someone at the top who knows it's all bullshit.
In a religion that person died.

[cbayer]

18. Lol, that's pretty funny actually.

I don't agree with it, though. I think some cult leaders are actually delusional and believe what they are saying. In other words, I don't think all cults are scams, though some are.

[Warren Stupidity]

50. Ah of course, the last resort of theists confronted with religious beliefs they can't support.

It's a cult!

[ZombieHorde]

52. Your subject line seems to contradict itself.

Do you think cults are not religious? Wasn't Jesus and the 12 disciples a cult?

[cbayer]

53. What subject line?

I think that there is a difference between a cult and a religion. Do you see no difference?

As to Jesus and his disciples, that is an interesting idea. I think some of the aspects of that little group would probably meet the criteria for a cult.

[ZombieHorde]

54. The subject line is the first line in the post. It's seperate from the body of the post.

Your subject line was: "I don't think they are religious. I think this is a cult."

I think that there is a difference between a cult and a religion. Do you see no difference?

A cult is a religion with few members.

[cbayer]

55. Sorry, I thought you were referring to the title of the OP.

I do not agree with your statement about the difference between cults and religions.

There are other criteria that I think are valid. There are very large cults and very small religions.

[ZombieHorde]

56. What are your definitions for the words "cults" and "religions?" nt

[cbayer]

58. I don't have clear definitions, but have liked a few things

I have seen on the internet.

It's like they once said about pornography - you know it when you see it.

There are, of course, a few things that I think most people would agree constitute religion and a few things that most people would agree constitute a cult.

And then there are a lot of things in the grey areas.

I think the calling established religions cults only serves one purpose - to dismiss and denigrate those thow ascribe to those beliefs.

Anyway, if you google, you will see some interesting and complex analyses of the two things and how they are different.

Other than the dismissive "it's just about numbers" response, do you see any difference?

[ZombieHorde]

59. I think your position is the bigoted position.

You clearly have an anti-cult bias. I do not have this bias, so when I say cults are small religions, I am not insulting any group.

[cbayer]

68. Wait, you are calling me bigoted because I see a difference between cults and religion?

You don't have a bias because you see them as equally negative things. If you were to be honest, you would recognize that you insult both groups.

I surprised and disappointed in your response here. I'm not a bigot.

[ZombieHorde]

69. Where did I say either one was negative?

I am not insulting either group. I am just saying a cult is a small religion. That is the sociological view of cults.

I'm not a bigot.

You seem to have a strong anti-cult bias.

[cbayer]

71. Where do you see an anti-cult bias.

I have beliefs about cults based on my own education, training and experience, though I think there are ones that are entirely benign and others that are very dangerous.

I think there are some major differences between cults and religions.

I don't think that makes me a bigot.

My sense is that you are using this argument to justify anti-theism, but I don't think it works.

[ZombieHorde]

72. All I am saying is that cults are small religions.

I am not trying to justify anti-theism because I am not an anti-theist.

If you are not anti-cult, then why is saying "cults are religions with fewer members" offensive?

[Warren Stupidity]

57. "A cult is a religion with few members." except when it isn't.

Cults can have huge followings, religions can have few followers. Really the difference is a cult is a religion that more established religions wish to deny "religion" status to.

[okasha]

60. Jesus and the twelve apostles

were all practicing, observant Jews. How does Judaism qualify as a "cult?"

[ZombieHorde]

61. They had new teachings, and were therefore a different sect.

The new sect was a cult. Most new sects of any religion begin as cults. For example, Christianity is not a cult, but there are many Christian cults, such as The Love Family. If enough people join The Love Family, they will cease to be a cult.

[okasha]

62. That would be news to them.

Certainly James, Peter snd John thought they were orthodox Jews, and so did other orthodox Jews of their own time.

[ZombieHorde]

63. Orothodox Jews don't consider Jesus to be the son of God.

If they did, the new sect wouldn't have formed. New sects have formed over much smaller details.

[okasha]

65. There's no evidence that either Jesus

or those who actually knew him considered him to be the son of Yahweh. Belief in his divinity postdates the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction/dispersal of the Jerusalem church.

[ZombieHorde]

66. They probably never existed in the first place.

But in the stories, he is the son of God.

[okasha]

67. The "Jesus never existed" canard

has been pretty thoroughly debunked.

The gospels of Luke and Matthew, the only two with birth narratives, were written after the fall of Jerusalem to Titus and the destruction of Judaism as Jesus and his contemporaries had known it. While Jesus as God's son by adoption would be acceptable in a Jewish contest (see Psalm 2), divine "biological" paternity would not be.

John Dominic Crossan makes a plausible case that these gospels borrowed from the Roman mythos surrounding Augustus to present Jesus as an alternate king of an alternate kingdom, both in stark contrast to Emperor and Empire.

[ZombieHorde]

70. There is no scientific evidence either way, and it's off topic, so I'll let that go.

Hopefully, we can both agree that there is a book about Jesus Christ, usually called The Holy Bible, and in the English translation of this book, Jesus is the son of God and the messiah.

I hope we can also agree that Orthodox Jews do not believe Jesus was/is the son of God and the messiah. This means the theological teachings of Jesus, according the English translation of The Holy Bible, were different in some ways than the teachings of Orthodox Jews.

This new teaching means new sect. This sect had few members at first, which means cult.

[okasha]

73. Sure, we agree on most of this.

My point is that the separation of Christianity (the new sect) from orthodox Judaism did not occur until after 70 CE--somewhere between 90 and 100 CE. Not coincidentally, that was about the time the gospels of Luke and Matthew began to gain currency.

[Heather MC]

6. Because...

At what age does this naked ritual begin?
Who will protect this child from this ritual, the mother doesn't have the mental compacity to consider this wrong. Her child is at risk of being molested.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

11. And this is different from other religions?

Jews and Christians who circumcise, snake handling Christians, Christian scientists who deny medical care?

There are plenty of religions that allow what I consider molestation from the moment of birth.

My point is not that her religion is 'right'. It is that we hypocritically give 'passes' to 'major religions' that aren't simply considered 'cults'.

[eggplant]

14. and Athiests who request circs while in the hospital after birth...

Let's not drag circumcision into a discussion about sexual abuse. It is a medical procedure performed on behalf of parents of many (and no) faiths.

[Heather MC]

15. Not me I am Atheist, I am not a fan of any religion, however

In other religions where molestation occurs, it is usually not with the parents willingly consent. That's the difference, the mother is willing to allow this to be done to the child. That's Sick.

In the Jewish tradition, that is also disgusting I agree.

[Jackpine Radical]

29. "Should she have incorporated?"

Shit. Ya beat me.

[rug]

41. Requiring digital pentration of a vagina is a clue.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

43. Doesn't sound any more ridiculous than a lot of other religious

weirdness to me. Probably some satanic groups that do similar, or even more sexual things.

[rug]

47. I'd calibrate my weirdness meter. Occam's razor applies here as well.

[wandy]

51. I think I might be able to come up with at least two reasons..........

1. She is not a corporate person with the resources to afford a highly paid team of lawyers.
2. Somehow this doesn't sound like one of those acceptable christian religions afforded first amendment protection from the law.

Just doesn't sound like this lady's hobby is a Hobby Lobby lobby.

[NorthCarolina]

21. The depth of ignorance in this country amazes me sometimes. nt

[cbayer]

25. This kind of eccentric cultish behavior is not limited to this country by any means.

[NorthCarolina]

26. Might not be "limited to", but it is surely more

prevalent in this country than I would have thought....and certainly more than I would hope.

[cbayer]

28. I agree with that, but I think the prevalence is probably pretty

stable across cultures and countries.

There will always be people who are deeply vulnerable and there will always be those who see them as bait.

[Turbineguy]

27. Funny how that works.

Spiritual Guidance.

[Jackpine Radical]

30. Kinda gives "snake handling" a new meaning.

[trotsky]

33. Heyyy-oooooohh!! n/t

[cbayer]

34. Well done, sir.

[libodem]

40. snicker

I see what you did there.