Q&A: Dealing with a Minor: Fair? Unfair?
Dealing with a Minor: Fair? Unfair?
Question
I saw a legislative proposal by an MK that it should be forbidden to persuade a minor, without parental consent, to become religious. [Only in school? And/or specifically through threats and intimidation? It doesn’t make much difference for my question; I’m asking about the principle, not the details.] Is that reasonable?
And would it also be reasonable if the law were symmetrical, such that it would be forbidden to persuade a minor to become non-religious without parental consent [maybe only in school, and/or specifically through threats and intimidation. Again, that doesn’t make much difference, because those are details, and I’m asking about the principle]?
Is that reasonable?
Answer
Completely reasonable. Any attempt to persuade someone to convert to another religion or sect and the like should be done either with the parents’ consent or with an adult.
Discussion on Answer
You don’t need to demand it from the High Court, but from the legislature. There indeed needs to be equality, and if there isn’t, I assume the High Court will force them to do it. As for videos, that’s something else. The videos are online, and any parent who cares for their children should monitor what they watch. You can’t impose censorship on the internet. At most, you can require the publisher to state that the video contains conversion/persuasion arguments, or that it is intended for a certain age and up.
What about the anti-missionary law?
I think there is inequality in it, because it forbids persuading adults to convert to Christianity as well, but does not forbid persuading people to become religious.
What do you think?
Absolutely. And I’ve written that here in the past as well. In my opinion it’s a scandalous law. And even if they made it equal and banned all preaching, I would oppose it. It’s gagging people.
Persuading people to convert to Christianity is a kind of subversion. Christianity’s goal is to erase the treasures of the heritage of Judaism. Christianity and Judaism, in this context, are identity. Persuading someone toward Christianity is persuading them to cast off Jewish identity, with all its cultural and historical value. Since the State of Israel is based on that identity, persuasion on a massive scale undermines the state in the long term.
Besides, we are Jews and Judaism is our concern. Our value perspective draws from there.
You can rest assured that with sophistry on this level, every side can come up with arguments to ban persuasion against its own position,
from right/left all the way to religious/Haredi (ultra-Orthodox)/secular, including emergency measures for dealing with the climate crisis.
It just has to be done on the other side too, and one should demand that the High Court rule the same way regarding becoming non-religious,
and regarding all the anti-religious videos that are aimed at minors too, like that “HaYaal” thing that tries to make fun of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh).