Jesus Camp

[kimmy]

Kimmy, you say you suspect that Moslems are judging you, but go on to say that if Christians are judging you, they keep it to themselves. Sorry to say, but I think it's all in your head.

Ever go out for supper with a bunch of vegetarians and order a big, rare steak?

Ever go out with your tee-totalling buddies and order a pint of beer?

Ever go out with Jewish friends and order pork-chops?

(I don't actually know any vegetarians, tee-totallers, or Jewish people... but that's not the point.) What I am trying to express is that there's an inherent awkwardness about doing something that directly contradicts someone's beliefs right in front of them.

If a woman is dressed in traditional Muslim clothes, it's a visual indicator that she believes in hijab... and that the way I'm dressed is inappropriate.

Bible-thumpers would disapprove of lots of things I do... but I don't actually wear any visual indicators of whether I have unmarried sex or drink alcohol or so-on. The Bible-thumpers don't really visually identify themselves as such, and I don't really visually identify myself as a lush or a slut. So that awkwardness isn't there in the same way. But traditional Muslim identify their belief in hijab by the way they're dressed, and that they disapprove of my lack of modesty is obviously implied... and that causes me to feel awkward before we've spoken a word.

-k

[Higgly]

Ever go out for supper with a bunch of vegetarians and order a big, rare steak?

Ever go out with your tee-totalling buddies and order a pint of beer?

Ever go out with Jewish friends and order pork-chops?

O yes. Many times. There is no way I would go out with a group of vegetarians and order steak. It would be provocative and, indeed, offensive. If you are out with them, it is because you respect them.

If your beliefs are in the majority, then you have to show some class and respect their beliefs. It is your responsibility to be as loudly solicitous as possible.

This, at least to me, is the Canadian way.

[kimmy]

O yes. Many times. There is no way I would go out with a group of vegetarians and order steak. It would be provocative and, indeed, offensive. If you are out with them, it is because you respect them.

If your beliefs are in the majority, then you have to show some class and respect their beliefs. It is your responsibility to be as loudly solicitous as possible.

This, at least to me, is the Canadian way.

So you understand why I say that it's awkward for me and my bare arms and my showy yellow hair to interact with somebody whose clothes indicate that she believes in traditional Muslim hijab?

-k

[Higgly]

O yes. Many times. There is no way I would go out with a group of vegetarians and order steak. It would be provocative and, indeed, offensive. If you are out with them, it is because you respect them.

If your beliefs are in the majority, then you have to show some class and respect their beliefs. It is your responsibility to be as loudly solicitous as possible.

This, at least to me, is the Canadian way.

So you understand why I say that it's awkward for me and my bare arms and my showy yellow hair to interact with somebody whose clothes indicate that she believes in traditional Muslim hijab?

-k

I think I do, but are you talking about people you have chosen to interact with or people you see on the street?

[kimmy]

I think I do, but are you talking about people you have chosen to interact with or people you see on the street?

Either. Does it make a difference? If I go buy something and the salesperson is wearing traditional Muslim garb, would you say I've chosen to interact with them?

-k

[Higgly]

Either. Does it make a difference? If I go buy something and the salesperson is wearing traditional Muslim garb, would you say I've chosen to interact with them?

-k

No I wouldn't. You did not chose to interact with them. You choose to buy something.

[Charles Anthony]

So you understand why I say that it's awkward for me and my bare arms and my showy yellow hair to interact with somebody whose clothes indicate that she believes in traditional Muslim hijab?

No. I do not understand. I think you are over-sensitive.

[betsy]

My problem is giving this sales pitch to children who are at an age where they are very impressionable and will believe anything from an adult figure of authourity (trust me I work with young children, its true). Its my belief we should all have the chance to decide for ourselves, when we are mentally capable of doing so, what religion (or no religion) is right for us. One of the priests flat out says its good to get em while theyre young and impressionable....I have issues with that

Parents are the MAIN adult figures of authority...of course children will learn from them and believe in their parents' belief. It is the parents natural right to pass down their belief and philosophy to their children.

You believe what you believe...and you pass it on to your children. That is a parental responsiblity!

What are you suggesting here? Let our children loose to roam the world to find their own way? It's not even safe to let them go to the mall by themselves!

I hope this does not mean what I suspect it means. Another banning waiting to happen?

Or is this just another "wishing will make it so."

[betsy]

i dont worry about their vote, personally, i worry about their motive once they grow up TO vote.

I worry about the motive of those who are already here! The fanatics from the other side of the fence!

Boy, when they start quoting these lines (which I got from comments on Brad's link)...

"They are too young to know what they think. To slap a label on a child at birth - to announce, in advance, as a matter of hereditary presumption if not determinate certainty, an infant's opinions on the cosmos and creation, on life and afterlives, on sexual ethics, abortion and euthanasia - is a form of mental child abuse." [Richard Dawkins]."

"To succeed the theologan invades the cradle. In the minds of innocents they plant the seeds of superstition. Save children from the pollution of this horror."- Col. Robert G. Ingersoll [1833-1899]"

It can't be far behind that some holy lobby group will push for all children to be raised and doctrined by the state. And I ain't talking about universal daycare! Although it's a giant step in that direction!

How does the parents of Rachel feel reading the vicious savageries aimed at their daughter? I am still disturbed by them...still angry and outraged by them! And I don't even know her!

Rhetorics and violent imageries, they take on a new light when we think of our own children as the cast of characters in these imageries. The innocence of Rachel in her joyful belief in Jesus....the innocence of our children in their joyful pursuit of Hockey. The impact of savagery is more than just disturbing...it grabs your heart...it becomes frightening....when we picture our own children in the shoes of Rachel.

[kimmy]

i dont worry about their vote, personally, i worry about their motive once they grow up TO vote.

I worry about the motive of those who are already here! The fanatics from the other side of the fence!

Boy, when they start quoting these lines (which I got from comments on Brad's link)...

"They are too young to know what they think. To slap a label on a child at birth - to announce, in advance, as a matter of hereditary presumption if not determinate certainty, an infant's opinions on the cosmos and creation, on life and afterlives, on sexual ethics, abortion and euthanasia - is a form of mental child abuse." [Richard Dawkins]."

"To succeed the theologan invades the cradle. In the minds of innocents they plant the seeds of superstition. Save children from the pollution of this horror."- Col. Robert G. Ingersoll [1833-1899]"

It can't be far behind that some holy lobby group will push for all children to be raised and doctrined by the state. And I ain't talking about universal daycare! Although it's a giant step in that direction!

The right of parents to raise their children in the religious tradition of their choice is guaranteed by our constitution. That's not going to change. Religious people who gripe about things like prayer being kicked out of schools are, ironically, complaining about the constitutional principle that guarantees them the freedom to raise their kids in the religious tradition of their choice. The principle that means little Sally's teacher can't have the class say the Lord's Prayer before class is the same principle that means that little Sally's teacher can't teach kids about the wonders of the Quran before class... and it's surprising that some Christian activists are apparently too dumb to recognize that.

Don't worry, Betsy, you'll always have the freedom to teach your kids all about Jeeeezus.

And Mrs Cruise will always have the freedom to teach her kids that our bodies are inhabited by the ghosts of space aliens.

And Mrs Khadr will always have the freedom to teach her kids that an eternity in paradise awaits if they die while fighting for the prophet.

Woo-hoo.

How does the parents of Rachel feel reading the vicious savageries aimed at their daughter? I am still disturbed by them...still angry and outraged by them! And I don't even know her!

Rhetorics and violent imageries, they take on a new light when we think of our own children as the cast of characters in these imageries. The innocence of Rachel in her joyful belief in Jesus....the innocence of our children in their joyful pursuit of Hockey. The impact of savagery is more than just disturbing...it grabs your heart...it becomes frightening....when we picture our own children in the shoes of Rachel.

Good grief. I don't think a few comments about slapping her qualify as "vicious savagery".

If little Rachel's parents read those comments, perhaps they'll think twice about having her roll up on complete strangers with advice about how to live.

-k

[sharkman]

Kimmy, you may not have noticed it, but you have a definite christian shaped chip on your shoulder. It is clouding your perspective on this issue. Did you have a bad experience with christianity as a kid or something? Not all Christians are evil.

At any rate the same classroom that can't have the Lord's prayer in it is teaching increasingly on the wonders of homosexuality. Sex should be taught by the parents, and the classroom should be for what used to be called the three R's. And they need to try harder with those since high school grads are increasingly having trouble reading, for instance.

[betsy]

How does the parents of Rachel feel reading the vicious savageries aimed at their daughter? I am still disturbed by them...still angry and outraged by them! And I don't even know her!

Rhetorics and violent imageries, they take on a new light when we think of our own children as the cast of characters in these imageries. The innocence of Rachel in her joyful belief in Jesus....the innocence of our children in their joyful pursuit of Hockey. The impact of savagery is more than just disturbing...it grabs your heart...it becomes frightening....when we picture our own children in the shoes of Rachel.

Good grief. I don't think a few comments about slapping her qualify as "vicious savagery".

If little Rachel's parents read those comments, perhaps they'll think twice about having her roll up on complete strangers with advice about how to live.

-k

"If she walked up to me, I would grab the leaflets and make her choke on it. "

"please god, help this girl smash her face on a rock."

If these do not qualify as "vicious savagery"...I guess brutalized women have been over-reacting about the "love taps" they get at home.

Anyway, what do the anti-spankers have to say about that, I wonder? Since most of them come from that other side of the fence!

[betsy]

If little Rachel's parents read those comments, perhaps they'll think twice about having her roll up on complete strangers with advice about how to live.

-k

Kimmy, this was all she said:

"Hi. um, God's just telling me that you're on his mind, and he just wants to take you and love on you and he has special plans for you and your life. He just wants you to follow him with your whole heart."

So where's the litany of thou shalt not? She just gave a 30-second spiel.

At least she did not come to the privacy of your own home trying to give you a demo...like salesmen of vacuum cleaners, air filters and water purifiers!

Why so sensitive about this girl's "advicing strangers how to live?" Doesn't commercials and ads practically spout out the same advice?

Don't the fanatical busy-body crusaders don't do just that? Very much in-your-face and maniacal in their quest for controlling our behaviours. Inside our own homes!

From what you should eat...to what you should breathe....to how you should die...to how you should raise your children...to how you should think...etc.,

If you should be sensitive about dictatorial intrusion by complete strangers "advicing" us how to live....then direct thy wrath and indignation towards....those fanatics over there...from that other side of the fence!

They plot for more as we speak.

[betsy]

[The right of parents to raise their children in the religious tradition of their choice is guaranteed by our constitution. That's not going to change. Religious people who gripe about things like prayer being kicked out of schools are, ironically, complaining about the constitutional principle that guarantees them the freedom to raise their kids in the religious tradition of their choice. The principle that means little Sally's teacher can't have the class say the Lord's Prayer before class is the same principle that means that little Sally's teacher can't teach kids about the wonders of the Quran before class... and it's surprising that some Christian activists are apparently too dumb to recognize that.

-k

We shouldn't have public schools at all then! Schools should be run by religious institutions. Atheist and Agnostics should have their own. Why should taxpayers bear the burden of supporting schools that do not recognize our beliefs...and undermine our values by teaching and promoting values that goes against our belief? That should make everyone happy.

[betsy]

When I see Muslims in traditional garb bumping around town, I feel a negative reaction. And it's not because I suspect that this person is planning to blow something up. When Muslims complain that people look at them as possibly terrorists, that's not it at all. I really don't. That's not what causes me to react negatively. My reaction is because I suspect that this person looks at me as (to coin a phrase) "a piece of uncovered meat."

If I'm face to face with a woman who believes that it's a sin if more than her face or her hands are showing... uh, I guess that makes me a sinner. There's a judgment implied. I don't blame her for dressing as she believes she has to, but at the same time, it's a very visual signal that we have different world views and that I don't conform to her idea of what's moral. And try as we might, that's going to color our interactions.

-kimmy

I do not feel Muslims wearing traditional garments judging me. I don't know why you would feel that way if you are on your own soil. For some reason you seem to feel guilt....where you should not.

[gnam]

In contrast, reason aims for (though often falls short... however, it is the best we have) truth, justice, and beauty. None of these are thought to be a matter of preference. Earlier, I suggetsed that if you thought there was some important truth in your religious convictions then you ought to be willing to share it by reasoning with us about how to come to see that truth. However, you have yet to give us any reason to buy your religious doctrine, and by extension the moralities grounded in it that go beyond an appeal to preference. If you cannot compell us to share in your faith then on what grounds would we be compelled to accept, as valid, any of your moralising(s)?

My question stands... on what grounds should any of your moral views, grounded as they are in a religious belief that you yourself say people are free to adopt or not as they see fit, carry any weight with anyone?

In other words, why do you think your moral opinions should matter to anyone who does not shre your taste?

Lol. Has the military wing of Jesus camp busted down your door, gnam, and forced you to join them?

Hmm.. heheh... no I don't recall any encounters involving jesus camp commandos, secret parishioners, or the re-education units of the righteous having breached the doorway to my apartment.

My concern here has been to question the legitimacy of citing religious beliefs, beliefs apparently (according to some of the other posters) chosen according to taste, as reason(s) for others to accept moral conclusions.

In other words I am interested in compelling arguments and reasoning, not people's religious taste.

[betsy]

My concern here has been to question the legitimacy of citing religious beliefs, beliefs apparently (according to some of the other posters) chosen according to taste, as reason(s) for others to accept moral conclusions.

In other words I am interested in compelling arguments and reasoning, not people's religious taste.

Religion is not a matter of taste for me...or for others like me.

Although for some it is....who want to pick and choose what morality should be in it...or what morality should be changed...or excluded.

Some go to the extent of challenging the church and its belief. Some end up creating their own religion...creating their own version of what they think it ought to be!

You wanted solid reason gleaned from compelling arguments. And I tell you, faith and reason do not go together!

I think you should re-read the exchanges...

[betsy]

If little Rachel's parents read those comments, perhaps they'll think twice about having her roll up on complete strangers with advice about how to live.

-k

Sorry to pick this one to the bone...but I do have trouble seeing how this simple action on Rachel's part can be so offensive to the point of attracting all these vicious comments.

I let a guy demonstrate a vacuum cleaner for me, since having done that way back....I know he was a newbie trying to get his experience and bearing on how to get his foot in the door. My mistake.

His supervisor entered the picture...and tried to "close the sale." When I wouldn't buy...the supervisor became insulting..and indicated I must love living like a slob if after seeing that my carpet has some piles of unseen dirt, I still cannot appreciate the superior performance of his product.

I guess I shoulda chased him with a machete!

Bottom line: we deal with people and propagandas telling us how to live...we're surrounded by them!

With how these people commented...and hardly anyone voiced any objections or pointed out the EXTREMISMS of such outbursts of emotions.......and they have the gall to criticize the "loonie-ness" of Jesus Camp?

These non-religious people are worse! Since they've got a a target in their sight! And it's only a little girl at that!

With all these things showing up...maybe Jesus Camp is not a bad idea. Christians never know what other loonies are out there!

[Jerry J. Fortin]

There is a place for religion, in the hearts and minds of its followers. It has no place in government or political policy. Render unto Ceaser and all that is about as accurate as it can get. Don't mix religion with politics because religion is personal and politics is social.

The Christian right is as bad as it gets in this regard. They criticize other religions and governments on a regular basis but should really stick to their knitting. Its none of their business. Look at the hypocrisy of advocating the death penalty when the religion is supposed to be based on forgiveness. How about the abortion issue, what happened to go forth and sin no more?

Fanatics from any corner have no place in politics, it should be broader based than that for "God's" sake.

[sharkman]

There is a place for religion, in the hearts and minds of its followers. It has no place in government or political policy. Render unto Ceaser and all that is about as accurate as it can get. Don't mix religion with politics because religion is personal and politics is social.

The Christian right is as bad as it gets in this regard. They criticize other religions and governments on a regular basis but should really stick to their knitting. Its none of their business. Look at the hypocrisy of advocating the death penalty when the religion is supposed to be based on forgiveness. How about the abortion issue, what happened to go forth and sin no more?

Fanatics from any corner have no place in politics, it should be broader based than that for "God's" sake.

So, you seem to have no problem with bible camps, just fanatics and religion in politics. Doesn't sound like you'd slap anyone though.

[kimmy]

Kimmy, you may not have noticed it, but you have a definite christian shaped chip on your shoulder. It is clouding your perspective on this issue. Did you have a bad experience with christianity as a kid or something? Not all Christians are evil.

I don't think Christians are evil. As I said before, I don't hate Christians at all. I hate fanatics, of all stripes, whether they wear pyjamas and stupid hats or dress like the rest of us.

Did you watch the clip of Becky Fisher, who speaks in admiring terms of the religious fervor that causes Muslim jihadis to blow themselves up for Allah, and wants to raise Christian kids to be "as radically laying down their lives for the Gospel as they are in Pakistan and Israel and Palestine and all those different places, because, excuse me, but we have the Truth."

That's what I hate. I don't hate Christians, I hate mindless stupidity.

Did I have a bad experience as a child? Not a bad experience, exactly. I will share this story from my childhood. One summer, me and some of my friends were playing, running around and pelting each other with under-ripe crab-apples that we pulled off neighbors trees without even asking. This was back in the old days when kids played outdoors... the early 1990s, it was. A friend arrived and invited us to go to a house in the neighborhood where they give out candy. She was promised extra candy if she could bring more kids. Candy? Kids love candy. We went, a whole group of us. When we arrived, there was a friendly couple, and as promised, there was candy. We sat in lawn-chairs in the back yard and munched on the offered candy while the friendly couple talked to us about Jeeeezus. They gave us little brochures and told us that if we came back tomorrow there'd be more candy and we would talk more about Jeeeezus.

When I got home dad asked where I'd been, and I told him about the candy and the Jeeeezus and showed him the brochures. He didn't say a word, he just took me by the hand, put me in the car, and told me to tell him how to get to the house. When we got there, dad took the brochures, told me to wait in the car, and went and pounded on the front door of the house and the man answered. I don't know what was said, but I could tell that dad was aggitated, as he pointed his finger and waved the brochure in the man's face.

Dad came back and we drove home. And that was the end of it. I didn't even have to ask to know that I wasn't supposed to go back to that house. As it turns out, none of my friends went back to that house either-- Jeeezus Summer Camp had been cancelled, permanently it seemed. It was never spoke of again. Perhaps the friendly couple tried to reach out to a different group of kids some other time, or perhaps a confrontation with an angry father the size and shape of an offensive lineman caused them to rethink the whole idea. I don't know what became of the friendly couple. Me and my friends went back to running around pelting each other with crab-apples, and that was the end of my first brush with evangelism.

At any rate the same classroom that can't have the Lord's prayer in it is teaching increasingly on the wonders of homosexuality. Sex should be taught by the parents, and the classroom should be for what used to be called the three R's. And they need to try harder with those since high school grads are increasingly having trouble reading, for instance.

Sex should be taught by the parents. Unfortunately, kids are being taught by tv, movies, the internet, and their classmates... kids hear all kinds of things about sex before they have that "birds and bees" chat with mom or dad (and in many cases, parents aren't able to provide them with any useful information anyway. In many cases the mother-daughter sex chat goes something along the lines of "don't do it." Well, that's great, but it doesn't tell her anything about pregnancy or disease...)

If parents want to tell their kids "don't do it", they're certainly welcome to, but at least talk about pregnancy and disease. Because the pressures on kids to have sex are a lot stronger than parents realize, and knowing about the consequences that come from having sex is more persuasive than "daddy will be angry" or "Baby Jesus will cry." When the alternative is being ostracized or bullied by their peers, lots of kids find it easy to conclude that daddy isn't going to find out and Baby Jesus will just have to deal with it. I'm sorry if that sounds sacrilicious, but it's an unfortunate truth. The parents who proudly tell their friends that "My little Suzie would never..." often have no idea what pressures little Suzie faces in the course of a typical school day, and having judgmental parents ensures that they're about the last people she'll talk to about it.

I don't recall school ever teaching about "the wonders of homosexuality", but I do recall them explaining that feeling attraction towards somebody of the same sex is no reason to kill yourself... is that such a bad thing?

Parents should certainly talk about sex with their kids, but at least let them have the information they need. And as for homosexuality, if parents want to tell their kids "I know they told you at school that it's ok to feel attracted to somebody of the same sex, but it really isn't. Jeeezus will love you less if you do," they're certainly still free to do so.

-k

[kimmy]

I'm leery about responding to Betsy's messages. Last time I addressed Betsy, she posted 5 responses. If I reply to those, she's bound to post 25 responses. If I reply to those, I'd have 125 responses to deal with. Obviously this can't continue for long without crashing the message board. So I'll attempt to control the exponential growth by simply giving an abridged response.

"If she walked up to me, I would grab the leaflets and make her choke on it. "

"please god, help this girl smash her face on a rock."

If these do not qualify as "vicious savagery"...I guess brutalized women have been over-reacting about the "love taps" they get at home.

You're comparing internet trash-talk to spousal battery? Get real, Betsy.

If you don't understand that there's a big difference between what people feel free to say on an internet message board compared to what they'd do in a real life situation, then I'm not sure you're qualified to be on the internet.

We shouldn't have public schools at all then! Schools should be run by religious institutions. Atheist and Agnostics should have their own. Why should taxpayers bear the burden of supporting schools that do not recognize our beliefs...and undermine our values by teaching and promoting values that goes against our belief? That should make everyone happy.

Yeah, or maybe you should impart your religious beliefs to your kids at home and leave school for (as Sharkman put it) "the 3 R's."

Or hey, you could even send your kids to a Catholic school. I don't know where you're located, but here in Awesometon, Alberta, there's oodles of Catholic schools, which I'm sure are being paid for by more than just Catholic tax-payers.

If little Rachel's parents read those comments, perhaps they'll think twice about having her roll up on complete strangers with advice about how to live.

Kimmy, this was all she said:

"Hi. um, God's just telling me that you're on his mind, and he just wants to take you and love on you and he has special plans for you and your life. He just wants you to follow him with your whole heart."

So where's the litany of thou shalt not? She just gave a 30-second spiel.

I've heard enough about "God's special plans for me" to know that it's chock full of "thou shalt." Rachel's god won't "take you and love on you" with no strings attached.

Rachel's little leaflets no doubt have the details. Contact the Holeee Jeeeezus Church of Strikes and Spares for information about God's special plans for your life, so that you can follow him with your whole heart and make him take you and love on you a lot!

At least she did not come to the privacy of your own home trying to give you a demo...like salesmen of vacuum cleaners, air filters and water purifiers!

Why so sensitive about this girl's "advicing strangers how to live?" Doesn't commercials and ads practically spout out the same advice?

If you can't see a difference between religion and vacuum cleaners, I'm at a loss.

-k

[betsy]

"If she walked up to me, I would grab the leaflets and make her choke on it. "

"please god, help this girl smash her face on a rock."

If these do not qualify as "vicious savagery"...I guess brutalized women have been over-reacting about the "love taps" they get at home.

You're comparing internet trash-talk to spousal battery? Get real, Betsy.

If you don't understand that there's a big difference between what people feel free to say on an internet message board compared to what they'd do in a real life situation, then I'm not sure you're qualified to be on the internet.

How many high school killers had been on the web bragging about their intent? Harris from Columbine was said to have bragged to want to "rip the arms off racists...etc..,"

Anyway, I'm just perplexed why you're trying to down-play those comments, Kimmy. Like they're just normal comments to say about a girl...whose only "crime" was to give that 30-second spiel.

I was responding to your comment:

"Good grief. I don't think a few comments about slapping her qualify as "vicious savagery."

And yes, compared to spousal abuse....a few comments about slapping a woman would get the rabid response of the feminists, and those who purport to abhor violence against women! Comments like those wouldn't be acceptable to them! They'd swoop down like locusts condemning those commentators!

How is this any different? Because Rachel happens to be a Christian?

[betsy]

At least she did not come to the privacy of your own home trying to give you a demo...like salesmen of vacuum cleaners, air filters and water purifiers!

Why so sensitive about this girl's "advicing strangers how to live?" Doesn't commercials and ads practically spout out the same advice?

If you can't see a difference between religion and vacuum cleaners, I'm at a loss.

-k

I guess you missed my other post:

"I let a guy demonstrate a vacuum cleaner for me, since having done that way back....I know he was a newbie trying to get his experience and bearing on how to get his foot in the door. My mistake.

His supervisor entered the picture...and tried to "close the sale."

When I wouldn't buy...the supervisor became insulting..and indicated I must love living like a slob if after seeing that my carpet has some piles of unseen dirt, I still cannot appreciate the superior performance of his product."

When these ADULT salesmen give their sales pitch in the privacy of your own homes...and as I had experienced, this guy even had the audacity to insult me right in my own home....in comparison to what Rachel had done, approaching someone in a public place, and giving her 30-second sales pitch along with a brochure....I think things are little bit out of whack here when this little girl is getting all these vicous comment!

If you can't see the comparison between the two....well I'm surely at a loss!

Like I said, you are surrounded by people and propagandas trying to tell you how to live...everyday of your waking life! A little annoyance from someone like Rachel is no big deal to normal people!

[sharkman]

Kimmi, it sounds like your dad taught you to how to treat those religious enough to talk about their faith. Pounding on the door and shoving your finger in their face as you utter threats.

It was wrong of this couple to entice kids into their back yard without parents permission, but freaking out at them is over the top.