Persecution for a PARODY of religion

Through the Wild Hunt blog, I learned of this horrifying story of a child snatched from his mother by a court determined to punish her for being a member of the Church of the Subgenius.

This is punishment and persecution, without even the pretense of protecting the boy. “Evidence” against the mom, Rachel Bevilacqua, includes her participating in events where her son was not present. (Some of those photos are of Starwood 25, an event I attended.)

[The judge] strongly disapproved of the photos of Rachel Bevilacqua in a bondage dress and papier mache goat’s head. The judge repeatedly asked, “Why a goat? What’s so significant about a goat’s head?” When Rachel replied, “I just thought the word ‘goat’ was funny,” Judge Punch lost his temper completely, and began to shout abuse at Rachel, calling her a “pervert,” “mentally ill,” “lying,” and a participant in “sex orgies.” The judge ordered that Rachel is to have absolutely no contact with her son, not even in writing, because he felt the pictures of X-Day performance art were evidence enough to suspect “severe mental illness”. Rachel has had no contact with Kohl since that day, February 3, 2006.

As of yesterday, Rachel was granted supervised visition with Kohl. The Church of the Subgenius is raising money for the family’s legal costs.

I am so mad I could spit. It makes my stomach hurt. To lose her child. Her child! Because of religion. In the 21st Century. In New York. I am torn between rage at the injustice, and agony on behalf of the mother and child, and did I mention rage?

16 comments

  1. Ken says:

    Rage doesn’t describe it fully……

  2. I read about this story awhile ago, and I honestly couldn’t believe it. It’s so shocking as to render me incapable of response.

  3. deblipp says:

    And I say again: In New York. Where I live. And I look at my son…

  4. Barbs says:

    Does this involve a custody dispute?

  5. deblipp says:

    Yes, apparently.

  6. Barbs says:

    i’m sorry I posted this before reading the article. what the judge did was enough to get it all tossed out. Unfortunatly this takes time and money plus the added factor of screwing with the kid
    Its sad. and I will not tolerate it

  7. MJ Ray says:

    I have never understood whether the Church of the Subgenius is a parody of a religion or a religion of parody.

    I am slightly troubled that every report about this case seems to eventually lead to the same single source. (You may remember the BBC’s problems with a single source a few years ago, even though it now seems the conclusions may have been correct.) Has anyone verified the reports independently?

  8. deblipp says:

    I have never understood whether the Church of the Subgenius is a parody of a religion or a religion of parody.

    I think both. 🙂

    I am slightly troubled that every report about this case seems to eventually lead to the same single source. (You may remember the BBC’s problems with a single source a few years ago, even though it now seems the conclusions may have been correct.) Has anyone verified the reports independently?

    It’s a valid question. Rachel’s blog has scanned copies of the court documents, so I am inclined to believe the information is correct.

  9. MJ Ray says:

    You are probably better placed to judge the authenticity of the court papers than a furrinagh like me.

  10. deblipp says:

    I’m not a lawyer. ::shrug:: It didn’t really occur to me that she would go to the trouble of faking up a bunch of court papers; presumably good enough to fool those who are checking. What would she gain? If it’s about custody, the judge is the wrong target, she’d go after the ex-husband.

    I suspect the reason we’ve only heard from one source is because this is so low-profile; a hoax would be more p.r. oriented.

  11. @ MJ Ray: As a SubGenius minister who’s preached at about a dozen devivals and have attended many X-Day events with Rachel, I can say that the Church is a parody religion that has far outstripped both parody and religion. But we’re sincere about our preaching–we may be funnier than almost any other religion out there, and more so than any of the intentionally funny religions, but the typical SubGenius “rant” usually has a few philosophical points sneaked in-between the humor, and for all the apparent nonsense, there’s usually quite a bit of GOOD SENSE interspersed.

    But mainly, it’s a society of people who have felt their entire lives that they were too strange for “normal” society. As the pictures demonstrate, we still do feel that way.

  12. deblipp says:

    Thanks, Lilith. I appreciate your point of view. I know the C. of S. only from knowing Ivan from a gazillion Starwoods. Of course, I laugh at the funny stuff, but it’s never been more than that for me. I guess Paganism itself satisfies a lot of my need for weird.

  13. MJ Ray says:

    deblipp, I’m surprised this is low-profile. Joy for media diversity.

    Sorry if anyone is offended by my scepticism. I don’t know the people and anyone can publish a web site these days (except many major corporations and my local council who consistently screw it up).

  14. deblipp says:

    I, for one, wasn’t offended. I thought it was a worthy question.

  15. Modemac says:

    Just an update to let you know that a lot of new information about this case has been made public over the past month. This, hopefully, should pot the skeptics’ minds at ease.

    Start here:

    http://www.modemac.com/wiki/Reverend_Magdalen

  16. deblipp says:

    Thanks for the update.