Here’s what I don’t understand. The judge claimed that “the New Jersey state constitution declares that ‘no person shall be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshiping Almighty God in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience.’ Despite Eleanor Katherine’s tender years, he continued, ‘the child should have the freedom to worship as she sees fit, and not be influenced by prospective parents who do not believe in a Supreme Being.’
All children are influenced by their parents’ beliefs. If one is raised in a particular religion, then clearly, while one is young, one does not choose her/his own religious beliefs — she/he is taught. When the child grows up, then of course they would have the opportunity to worship as he or she sees fit. He or she has the opportunity to renounce religion, or change religions, or remain within their own. Similarly, I do not see why if someone is raised as an atheist, they would not be able to choose their own belief system later in life. Does the judge believe that people who are raised atheists won’t be able to find religious beliefs by themselves if they so choose? How on earth is his argument logical or even consistent?
