Atheist kids "kidnapped' and sent to spooky Christian re-education centre.

studiorat

Quicker to just burn 'em at the stake methinks...

These places exist IN AMERICA, they're completely legal, and they're only growing. It's the new solution for parents who have kids that don't conform blindly to their religious and political views, let me explain: After the initial shock of what I thought was a kidnapping, it was explained to me that my parents had arranged for me to attend Horizon Academy (http://www.horizonacademy.us/) because I admitted to them that I was atheist and didn't agree with a lot of their hateful views. Let me give you a detailed run-down of my experience here:

http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/q6is0/in_september_2009_after_admitting_to_my_parents/

Peregrinus

Hmm.

This place sounds unpleasant, but it may not be fair to describe it as a "Christian reeducation centre". The website doesn't suggest that it has any religious character at all, and religion doesn't seem to appear in the curriculum or the daily activities. And the website suggests the school's character is this:

"Horizon Academy is a private, specialty boarding school for grades 7-12. We work with students who are good teens but have gotten off track and are heading down a bad road. Our students usually have a history of behavior problems including defiance, school troubles, drug or alcohol issues and anger-management difficulties, disrespectful to parents and authority figures with entitlement mentality. Although we are not a drug rehab, we have been successful working with students who had begun experimenting and/or have these dependencies."

It could be that this bloke's parents decided that he was being "disrespectful to parents and authority figures" because of his atheism. On the other hand, if asked, they might tell a different story. And, regardless, the motivation of this bloke's parents for sending him there might reflect on them, but can hardly characterise the whole school. I also note that at no point in the lengthy linked article does the guy actually say that the school attempted to force religious beliefs, attitudes or practice on him.

The place may stink. I suspect it does. But trying to characterise it as a "Christian re-education centre" may be a bit tendentious. On the evidence so far, it's not a Christian anything, and doesn't pretend to be.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Sounds creepy. Especially if he kidnapping bit is accurat.

It also sounds like the point is to conform as much to educate. whether to required religious, political or social norms. A kid could equally be sent there if he was dating someone the family didn't like or, God forbid, a democaat.

altogether now:
In the la-aaaand of the freeeeeee..........

Website FAQs wrote:

. Q: How often are visits allowed?
A: Visits and phone calls are allowed with the teen reaches the appropriate level of status as an earned privilege.

Hmmm.....

they have existed for a long time not as religious centres but general misbehaving centres. read up on "tranquility bay" for example.

Pwpane

Peregrinus wrote: »

Hmm.

This place sounds unpleasant, but it may not be fair to describe it as a "Christian reeducation centre". The website doesn't suggest that it has any religious character at all, and religion doesn't seem to appear in the curriculum or the daily activities. And the website suggests the school's character is this:

"Horizon Academy is a private, specialty boarding school for grades 7-12. We work with students who are good teens but have gotten off track and are heading down a bad road. Our students usually have a history of behavior problems including defiance, school troubles, drug or alcohol issues and anger-management difficulties, disrespectful to parents and authority figures with entitlement mentality. Although we are not a drug rehab, we have been successful working with students who had begun experimenting and/or have these dependencies."

It could be that this bloke's parents decided that he was being "disrespectful to parents and authority figures" because of his atheism. On the other hand, if asked, they might tell a different story. And, regardless, the motivation of this bloke's parents for sending him there might reflect on them, but can hardly characterise the whole school. I also note that at no point in the lengthy linked article does the guy actually say that the school attempted to force religious beliefs, attitudes or practice on him.

The place may stink. I suspect it does. But trying to characterise it as a "Christian re-education centre" may be a bit tendentious. On the evidence so far, it's not a Christian anything, and doesn't pretend to be.

Echoes of the Magdalen Laundries and the Industrial Schools?

Some girls were sent away in case they 'got into trouble'; some children were sent away for obstreperous behaviour.

Peregrinus

Pwpane wrote: »

Echoes of the Magdalen Laundries and the Industrial Schools?

Some girls were sent away in case they 'got into trouble'; some children were sent away for obstreperous behaviour.

But the Magdalen laundries did conceive of themselves, and present themselves, as religious instititutions, and they were run by religious orders. it seems to me entirely legitimate to invoke the Magdalen laundries in a discussion of religion, or churches. This place, not so much; the connection to religion looks fairly tenuous to me.

Pwpane

Well, perhaps those running the laundries and the industrial schools started out with the idea of doing good whereas the places mentioned in the OP may have had purely business reasons.

But there seems to be some similarities in the referral system that seems to have developed, in the willingness of courts and parents to condemn the vulnerable to harsh institutions with no real questioning of the operation of same, in the blind belief of parents in the 'good' of official institutions, and in the prevention of proper communication between the inmates and the outside world.

I was making the comparison to make obvious the difference? That authoritarian institutions can thrive in different societies, religious or not. That they are sustained from outside, not inside, if that makes sense.

Peregrinus

Well, I think that’s right. It’s entirely legitimate to point to the involvement of churches in institutions like the Magdalen laundries, and to draw conclusions about the churches from that. But I think we have to accept that the churches didn’t do this in a vaccum; institutions like the Magdalen laundries lasted because they filled a need, or a perceived need, for enforcing social conformity and putting embarrassing realities out of sight. The truth is that young women went into Magdalen laundries and stayed there, in large part, because horrible as they were they were better than any of the alternatives. And it’s not difficult to find other societies where pregnant unmarried girls were treated in pretty much the same way, with no church involvement.

None of this is to excuse the churches, but to make the point that the churches couldn’t abuse people if we didn’t let them and facilitate them. And if we do let people be abused, they will be - by churches, or by other institutions or agencies.