|
Shouldn't
a religious alternative be a choice for someone who is ordered by
the court to seek counseling? People of faith need to be aware of
current bills in Utah and California which expose the disparity in
what is being made available, while a Canadian proposal rings
alarm bells. The scene demands a deeper look.
In
Utah, House Bill 325 flew through to the Senate two weeks ago.
Entitled "Court Ordered Counseling", it reads, "If
a person is ordered by the court to participate in counseling as
part of a program or treatment plan, the person may be allowed to
be counseled by a member of the clergy upon the request of the
person and with the approval of the judge " A law that
says troubled souls can choose clergy for help. Doesn't that make
sense? (see it online at
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2003/bills/hbillint/hb0325.htm
Contrastingly,
a proposal in California's Legislature, AB 259, would order teens
who get rough at a football game to twelve hours of "anger
management". Yet, shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Kleibold of
the Columbine tragedy both passed "anger management"
courses and obviously all that did was make them more angry.
What
about finding out what is going on with the person's life and
helping them move into a positive direction, helping them sort out
right and wrong, doing unto others as you would have others do
unto you?
Meanwhile
a committee in Ontario, Canada has proposed changes to their
Regulated Health Professions Act so that "emotional
counseling" would be restricted to psychiatrists and
psychologists. This would mean clergy and chaplains (not to
mention moms or scout leaders) could not legally listen to someone
opening their heart for help. Luckily the Multifaith Council
on Spiritual and Religious Care in Toronto and other groups are
fighting these proposed changes to ensure ministers can minister,
as per the word's definition: give service, care or aid to.
Are
these last two examples of a mental health agenda to intentionally
infiltrate the realm of religion?
Let's
look further: at a letter from the head of Los Angeles County's
Department of Mental Health addressed "Dear Clergy Forum
Participant," dated 20 May 2002. The letter thanks
clergy for attending a free breakfast where pastors were
"encouraged" to send troubled parishioners to
"mental health professionals". That these
"professionals" derive their techniques from Freud's
atheist theory that "all religious ideas are illusions"
and everyone's problems are based on repressed sexual urges was
not mentioned at the Clergy breakfast (which I attended).
And the fact that the mental health industry's own studies prove
people do better who are religious and recover better with
religion was also conveniently never mentioned.
|