The obvious solution, that I haven't seen posted-but haven't read all of them, is for the father to have her two nights, but Saturday isn't one of them. His problem was that he didn't want to douse her religious convictions, but wanted to be accepted for his opinion, without having to take her back early because she wanted to attend church. Change the overnights to Thursday and Friday nights, with the daughter going home Saturday evening. They would spend as much time together as they are currently, and the religious discussions would not be as severe. If he wanted to go to church to show his support of her, it would go a lot further in getting her to understand respect of other people's ideas, than challenging her beliefs will.

The father needs to get full custody of his daughter with supervised visitation given to her mother. When she sees the mother, it must be a week night, and the mother is not to be allowed to transport her anywhere.

Training a child to live in constant fear is abuse. The mother is an idiot.

"Sweetie, Daddy's soul is not going to hell forever. Daddy is going to crumble into dust and nothingness forever, because Daddy has no soul. And the same is true for you!"

Obviously, dad has every right to convey his beliefs to his daughter, but I guess I'm not sure why his beliefs would be any less fearsome to her than mom's.

If i was afraid of eternal damnation, unceasing misery and immense suffering, I would be rather relieved to learn that I was only going to be plant food. That doesn't seem so bad. Look, the understanding that we are finite creatures with limited lives may be hard for people that have convinced themselves that spiritual warfare between God and Satan for possession of their soul is going on. It's flattering to be at the center of such a cosmic drama. We like to be the center of attention and Christian mythology has two powerful deities battling it out for our souls. What could make us feel more important? However, there's nothing inherently fearsome about natural death. If we're willing to accept that we're not the center of the universe, we can actually be quite happy making the best of what we've got. You are right, however, that the daughter is unlikely to see things that way.

Why are we arguing here about who has the correct belief? Intelligent people disagree.

It is completely intolerant to say that the girl should be forced to change her beliefs. How is that any better than her saying that her father should change his? It is the exact same thing. If you think there is a difference, you are simply saying that you align with his belief instead of hers.

To say that he should get full custody just because the mother is a Christian is saying that the government should be fascist enough to restrict religious freedom. That is a very scary thought. Imagine a world in which you have to renounce your religion or your children will be taken away. I don't doubt that it very possibly will happen in the not-too-distant future, but it makes me incredibly sad.

I don't think that the statement about the father getting full custody is just because the mother is Christian. I think it is because she is fanatically Christian. The key word isn't Christian but fantical. The mother is encouraging the child to believe that her father is evil and going to hell because he believes in something different. The child is pressuring the father to change his evil ways because she fears for him. The father tries to explain that his beliefs are just different. It is possible that he is as fanatical as the mother in his beliefs. I don't know. It is also possible that if the child wasn't getting the training that everything is absolute good or absolute evil, the father would be less inclined to keep her from church on his weekends.

It is a good plan but school may be a problem, depending on where dad lives in relation to Mom. Plus, getting the daughter for a day where 8 hours is already book is a similar problem to having to take her back to church. I like your line of thinking though :)

Tom_Tildrum:

"Sweetie, Daddy's soul is not going to hell forever. Daddy is going to crumble into dust and nothingness forever, because Daddy has no soul. And the same is true for you!"

Obviously, dad has every right to convey his beliefs to his daughter, but I guess I'm not sure why his beliefs would be any less fearsome to her than mom's.

I guess I fail to see anything remotely fearsome in that belief.

Tolerating another's beliefs does not mean sharing them; it simply means not disrespecting someone only because of their beliefs. Some beliefs, however, should be discouraged in a free society.

How can a society be free if it discourages some beliefs? Shouldn't all beliefs be respected equally? The answer is "no." Beliefs that are antithetical to freedom and mutual respect - important traits of a free society, IMO - should not be tolerated, and it does not offend traditional notions of freedom to be intolerant of such beliefs.

For example, American-Muslims' belief in the five pillars of Islam should be tolerated by all Americans, even if most Americans do not share such belief. However, Americans should not be required to accommodate a "belief" that America should be transformed into an Islamist state against the will of non-believers.

Similarly, Christians’ belief that Jesus is our lord should be tolerated by all Americans, even those – including myself – who do not share that belief. But, Americans should not feel compelled to accommodate a “belief” it is okay to cajole, harass, or otherwise emotionally blackmail non-believers into going to church. Nor should Americans tolerate a belief that it is proper to teach children that doing such is okay.