Autistic boy banned from church

[Smile:)]

I'm so mad about this! It's all very worgn!!!
My borther is autistic, and even though it's nowhere near as bad as this boy seems to be, I believe that's because my family has become christians. Jesus has changed my borther so much and I think He can do the same for this boy, but kicking him out of church isn't going to do any good.

[RobinSena]

I'm so mad about this! It's all very worgn!!!
My borther is autistic, and even though it's nowhere near as bad as this boy seems to be, I believe that's because my family has become christians. Jesus has changed my borther so much and I think He can do the same for this boy, but kicking him out of church isn't going to do any good.

That's the difference. They aren't saying that no autistic people are allowed to attend, they're saying that this boy is too disruptive/dangerous.

[Smile:)]

That's the difference. They aren't saying that no autistic people are allowed to attend, they're saying that this boy is too disruptive/dangerous.

Yes, I understand that.
My point is that kicking this boy out isn't going to help him.

[RobinSena]

Yes, I understand that.
My point is that kicking this boy out isn't going to help him.

According to the church, they've tried to compromise, but the family has refused.

Honestly, it's better than one person be kicked out, than for anyone who attends the church to be put in danger.

[Smile:)]

I see your point. But I believe that christ can change this boy so he's no longer a danger to others, like He did for my borther. And I think the church has gone about this the worgn way.

[Raiden no Kishi]

I see your point. But I believe that christ can change this boy so he's no longer a danger to others, like He did for my borther. And I think the church has gone about this the worgn way.

And his being in that church for the last decade or so has helped him become less dangerous how? Also, think about the church and congregation's perspectives on the issue. The boy is a danger. Is it right for the family to continue bringing him in and therefore endangering those around him?

On a minor note, I believe you keep meaning to type "wrong" and "brother".

.rai//

[Nate]

And I think the church has gone about this the worgn way.

The church tried to go about it the right way but the mother refused. Therefore the only person doing anything wrong is the mother, not the church.

So I have a question for you, Smile. If punching children, knocking over old people, spitting on other people, and PEEING IN THE SANCTUARY are not good grounds to have the kid kicked out, what is? Does he literally have to murder someone before you agree that he should be kicked out?

As I said before, even the Bible says to treat people like unbelievers if they don't change their behavior. This time has come and gone for this woman's kid. Keeping dangerous people in church is not the right thing to do.

[Fish and Chips]

I'm so mad about this! It's all very worgn!!!
My borther is autistic, and even though it's nowhere near as bad as this boy seems to be, I believe that's because my family has become christians.

The family is staunchly Catholic. Are you implying something?

[mechana2015]

So I have a question for you, Smile. If punching children, knocking over old people, spitting on other people, and PEEING IN THE SANCTUARY are not good grounds to have the kid kicked out, what is? Does he literally have to murder someone before you agree that he should be kicked out?

You forgot getting in other peoples cars and threatening to run people over with them.

[Smile:)]

And his being in that church for the last decade or so has helped him become less dangerous how? Also, think about the church and congregation's perspectives on the issue. The boy is a danger. Is it right for the family to continue bringing him in and therefore endangering those around him?

On a minor note, I believe you keep meaning to type "wrong" and "brother".

.rai//

The church tried to go about it the right way but the mother refused. Therefore the only person doing anything wrong is the mother, not the church.

So I have a question for you, Smile. If punching children, knocking over old people, spitting on other people, and PEEING IN THE SANCTUARY are not good grounds to have the kid kicked out, what is? Does he literally have to murder someone before you agree that he should be kicked out?

As I said before, even the Bible says to treat people like unbelievers if they don't change their behavior. This time has come and gone for this woman's kid. Keeping dangerous people in church is not the right thing to do.

You're all rigth, not that I'm wrogn. What you're saying is ture, but there is always two sides to every story. I saw my side frist because of my brother, you can't even begin to understand what it's like for someone who is autistic, or even what it's like for there family unless you know frist hand. Because of that I am some-what overly senitive to this subjet.

The family is staunchly Catholic. Are you implying something?

Not even kinda.

On a minor note, I believe you keep meaning to type "wrong" and "brother".

Two words I always get wrong

[Nate]

I saw my side frist because of my brother, you can't even begin to understand what it's like for someone who is autistic, or even what it's like for there family unless you know frist hand. Because of that I am some-what overly senitive to this subjet.

Oh, I don't doubt it. That's the thing is we all have our biases, and we tend to adhere to those biases whenever something like this comes up. It's kind of like that thread about M-rated games. I play M-rated games, so obviously I'm biased in favor of them.

I'm not claiming I know what it's like for someone who's autistic. I have absolutely no idea as I'm not, nor are any of my family members. Things may be very difficult for the mother, I'm sure they are, raising a son like that. I feel bad for her, I do. The problem is, again, the church made every effort to accommodate her. They offered compromises that would have allowed her son to be at the services, and still not endanger anyone. She refused.

I'm not sure why. Maybe she's trying to be a martyr, which is disgusting that she would use her son in such a way. Especially when the church apparently has no problem with autistic people, judging from the fact that another family brought in their autistic daughter. It's not the fact that he has autism, it's his behavior that's the problem.

You can say that the condition and the behavior are linked and intertwined and so to find fault with one is to find fault with the other, but that's not exactly true. Remember the whole "Love the sinner, hate the sin" charge we Christians like to talk about so often? This is basically the case here. The church doesn't hate the boy, he's just dangerous. The church needs to look out for the safety of its members. They can't put everyone in jeopardy just for one boy.

Let me put it this way. If some kid is running around acting up, harming people, acting disrespectful, and being a general jerk, regardless of his condition, how many people do you think will stay in this church? How many people are going to willingly stay in a congregation where someone might punch them, break their hip, spit on their face, or pee on their hair? I'd be willing to bet not many.

And this is taking it to a bit of an extreme, and I'm not saying this would happen, but let's say a large number of people leave the congregation. Now the church doesn't have enough members to support it financially. Thus the church is forced to shut down, all because one mother refused to compromise.

Doesn't that seem wrong, autism or no? Again, the church shutting down would be EXTREMELY unlikely (especially given Catholic doctrine regarding Mass), but it is a possibility. Besides, as I've said before, people should be able to go to church without fear that they will be injured or peed on. I understand your biases because of autism, but autism shouldn't be an excuse.

To put it bluntly, if this boy wasn't autistic, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. If it was just a normal boy with no medical conditions punching people and peeing on them I guarantee every single one of us would be saying to kick him out. Therefore we agree the actions are inexcusable. The fact that he has a medical condition shouldn't make them acceptable, any more than saying that it's acceptable for someone with kleptomania to steal.

[Prince Asbel]

I think you hit the nail right on the head, Nate.

[Tsukuyomi]

Like I said before, I don't think it's that he's autistic. It's just that he's endangering others of the church. He got into someone's else car while people were standing in front of it o.o Yes, no one knows what autistics go through, but. .does that mean we have to put others in danger when it's known what they can potentially do.. Have done already?

I still stick by what I think. It's not anything having to do with him being autistic. It's about him being disruptive and destructive o.o His family have been requested to keep him away due to his behavior. It could be anyone, me or you. The outcome would have been the same if he were putting others in danger.

He may have not had any control over it, but his mom could've helped by trying out the suggestions the priest had suggested, but no, she did no such thing. She shot them down without giving them a second thought. He may have not been in the same room as everyone, but at least he would still be there. I think it would've done him good actually. If he doesn't like being isolated, then that could be his motivation to try to get pass his actions

I'm not trying to bash on the family, but I wonder how much they have tried working with him? Instead of arguing with the church leaders, they can be working with their son and trying to help him over come his anxiety attacks and whatnot. I'm pretty sure they do work with him, but.. I don't know. If he's doing this stuff till this day (before he was kicked out), then I don't know. I mean, he does all this stuff and the mother seems to be ignorant of it all. I'm guessing she went against the church's wishes more then once in order for them to file an actual restraining order o.O

(I'm sorry if anything came out wrong.)

*Comes back and remembers to push Post Quick Reply* >_>

[Fish and Chips]

Not even kinda.

That is funny.

I'm so mad about this! It's all very worgn!!!
My borther is autistic, and even though it's nowhere near as bad as this boy seems to be, I believe that's because my family has become christians. Jesus has changed my borther so much and I think He can do the same for this boy, but kicking him out of church isn't going to do any good.

See, because you have an Autistic brother, much like this family, except not much like this family at all because your family "Has become Christians. Jesus has changed my brother so much and I think he can do the same for this boy." I.E., implying faith makes the differences means implying faith is the difference, and their apparent lack of it because of their son certainly has not gotten any better like your brother has. But I shan't repeat myself.

Regardless, his condition does not excuse his behavior. We can argue all day and all night whether it is "His fault" or not, but that isn't the point. A man commits a crime, but whether for vice, desperation, passion, or coersion by forces beyond his control, he is still guilty. They're not banning this boy because he's autistic, they're banning him because he is disruptive and dangerous to the people around him.

[Tsukuyomi]

I'm sorry, but I think it was so wrong for the mother to round up other families with autistic kids to make it look like the church were the bad guys o_o Having the other family bring in their autistic daughter proves it u_u

I may not have any kids, but I do have nieces and nephews that are like my own, so I can understand her wanting to think that they can do no wrong, but that's not the case u_u/

[Smile:)]

Now that I've given it more thought I'm starting to think it may have been the only thing left to do.

My mom said that no mater how bad someone's autism is their mother, or father should have more control over them. Though I would like to point out that peopel with autism can have very little to no control over them self. So I guess this all realy falls on the mother, and not the church.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Now that I've given it more thought I'm starting to think it may have been the only thing left to do.

My mom said that no mater how bad someone's autism is their mother, or father should have more control over them. Though I would like to point out that peopel with autism can have very little to no control over them self. So I guess this all realy falls on the mother, and not the church.

Indeed. Certainly no one here, and I doubt the Pastor of that church, has accused the child, or blamed him. But just because he is not at fault for his actions does not mean he is not making them... That's the fine line.

[animewarrior]

Even though I feel like basically everything to say has been said I'll still post my thoughts on the matter.

I don't claim to know much about autism however I think that we really need to pray for this boy and his family. What I do know about people with autism is that they DO have feelings like the rest of us. I'm going to pray for this 13 year boy. I can't imagine being in his situation, however I DO know that 13 is a tender age, and this boy is probably struggling with this development in his life. I know his behaviour is a problem, and he needs to fix it, so hopefully his parents and him can sort through his disruptive behaviour.

Do I think not attending Mass is a SIN?...no. However to avoid a denomination clash, I'll just say that I think the boy should be able to find a church where he is accepted, whether that be another Catholic church, or some other denomination. AFTER he fixes his behaviour. Who knows maybe he can go to his Catholic church after?

So I'd encourage others to pray for this boy. Anyways, that's all I have to say on this topic.

[beau99]

Regardless, his condition does not excuse his behavior. We can argue all day and all night whether it is "His fault" or not, but that isn't the point. A man commits a crime, but whether for vice, desperation, passion, or coersion by forces beyond his control, he is still guilty. They're not banning this boy because he's autistic, they're banning him because he is disruptive and dangerous to the people around him.

I'm really sorry, but I vehemently disagree with you.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Beau, out of curiosity, what is your stance with the issue? And what exactly are you disagreeing with?

If you are saying that he is free from guilt of committing acts of disturbance, then I.... think I might agree with you with that one. As far as I know, those with Autism cannot necessarily comprehend what is socially acceptable or not. Is he committing acts of disturbance? Yes. Is it his fault? I'm inclined to say no. However, that does not mean he is free to act how he wants to.

[Nate]

I'm really sorry, but I vehemently disagree with you.

In turn, I vehemently disagree with you. A medical condition does not excuse behavior.

If it did, kleptomaniacs should be able to shoplift all they wanted without fear of arrest. Nymphomaniacs could rape at will with nothing to stop them. People with schizophrenia could murder whenever they wanted.

You see what I mean? A medical condition does NOT make a behavior acceptable. Even if this boy is autistic, that does not give him the right to abuse others.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

In turn, I vehemently disagree with you. A medical condition does not excuse behavior.

If it did, kleptomaniacs should be able to shoplift all they wanted without fear of arrest. Nymphomaniacs could rape at will with nothing to stop them. People with schizophrenia could murder whenever they wanted.

Partially true. However, Schizophrenia is a psychotic disorder, not due to mental retardation. Schizophrenics, Nymphomaniacs, and Kleptomaniacs are all able to cognitively process things just like anybody else. Schizophrenics happen to just listen to their hallucinations and believe them. Kleptomaniacs understand that stealing is wrong, but they do so anyway due to their condition. Nymphomaniacs understand that nonconsensual sex is wrong (Unless they're also sociopathic), yet have frequent urges for sexual activity. (And bear in mind that Hypersexuality/Nymphomania is difficult to accurately diagnose) are just scaryPeople with Autism cannot because it is a result of mental retardation, i.e. undeveloped/underdeveloped areas of the brain.

So really, I don't think you can make such a comparison. However, I still agree that simply because one has Autism does not mean he should be given leeway to commit acts of disturbance. People with Autism can have a sense or morality and learn right from wrong to some degree; but not always, or at least to the level of normal-functioning humans. As for this specific case, I don't think we will ever know.

[beau99]

In turn, I vehemently disagree with you. A medical condition does not excuse behavior.

If it did, kleptomaniacs should be able to shoplift all they wanted without fear of arrest. Nymphomaniacs could rape at will with nothing to stop them. People with schizophrenia could murder whenever they wanted.

You see what I mean? A medical condition does NOT make a behavior acceptable. Even if this boy is autistic, that does not give him the right to abuse others.

Except that autism is not a medical condition, and the schizophrenia example is a bad one.

I'm probably showing my bias, as I'm autistic myself. I will ALWAYS stand up for the autistic person.

[Nate]

Except that autism is not a medical condition, and the schizophrenia example is a bad one.

Well I think that it's probably a better example than the nympho one. XD I just couldn't think of a mental condition that would lead to rape, so I did as best I could.

It really depends on the type of schizophrenia though. For example the kind where you hear voices (which are usually attributed to God or Satan) often do tell the person to kill people. And if you think God is telling you to kill someone, you're probably gonna do it.

I'm probably showing my bias, as I'm autistic myself. I will ALWAYS stand up for the autistic person.

Oh I don't doubt it. And like I told Smile, not being autistic nor having ever dealt with an autistic person, it's a bit hard to see things from that side. All I can see is, like I said, the church made every effort to bend over backwards for the woman and she refused all of it. To me, the safety of others is more important than her convenience.

As I said earlier, it shouldn't have to come to this kid putting someone in the hospital or the morgue before the church is allowed to take action. The fact that he has knocked over old people and punched people and revved a parked car while people are in front of it is enough justification to have him removed.

Kind of like how if someone sends you threatening letters saying "I will murder you" you don't have to wait until they're actually in your house before you can call police.

[animewarrior]

*looks at teh deteriorating thread* OH NOES!!! Just read my post peoples... PLEASE DON'T FIGHT!! O.o We are a family here... >.<

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Except that autism is not a medical condition, and the schizophrenia example is a bad one.

Sorry, beau, but it technically is. It's listed in the DSM-IV, so it's psychologically classified as a Mental Disorder by the APA.

[Tsukuyomi]

Except that autism is not a medical condition

Then may I ask what autism is if not a medical condition? Then what has this argument (in the article) been all about? The mother made it look like the church was discriminating against her son for having autism when it was not in fact that at all o.o

Hmmm, lets see... If it was you in the church leader's shoes.. What would you do if the members in your church were put in danger (not just potential danger, but actual danger)? What would you do in their shoes?

(I'm sorry if that seemed like I was picking on you directly ^ ^ That question can go to anyone as well ^__^)

*looks at teh deteriorating thread* OH NOES!!! Just read my post peoples... PLEASE DON'T FIGHT!! O.o We are a family here... >.<

It's alright I don't think anyone's arguing No one has stormed out, so that's a very good sign We're all ust trying to understand eachother is all
Right guys ^ ^?

[Cap'n Nick]

Imposing restrictions on a person doesn't imply guilt. It only acknowledges the reality of their limitations. For example, I fly in airplanes rather than flapping my arms vigorously. I'm not guilty of not flying, I simply need an airplane to fly. More realistically, a blind man isn't guilty of blindness, he simply needs help to see. Different people need help with all sorts of things, like walking, or not stealing, or even behaving in church.

Because we're not perfect, we can't always give people the help they need everywhere they need it. This doesn't mean we drop people out of airplanes or let blind men wander the freeway. It does mean that we restrict people to places and situations in which they and those around them are safe. We should always work to make people as free as possible, but we should also understand that's it not realistic to expect all situations to be made safe for all kinds of people. People with special needs should rejoice in the freedoms won for them and work toward the expansion of their freedoms, not curse those who are sacrificing for them for failing to deliver that which they cannot.

Guilt is probably the least useful way to look at this problem. It implies a level of control that no one involved really has. When tragedy strikes, even in the form of mental illness, we should be looking at how to pick up the pieces and not where to point the fingers.

[CelticWarrior20]

Im autistic i have aspergers syndrome in fact but the point is that the priest handeld it wrong he should have said i am going to bring u communion every sunday to ur house

[Cap'n Nick]

We don't know he didn't do that. Having worked as a chaplain myself, I do know that even if that particular parish wouldn't do it (which would not be typical), the boy's family could call another one that would. If the boy is a Catholic in good standing and desires the Mass, there are structures in place that ensure that his chances of not receiving it are virtually nil.