Is this what the Founding Fathers were working on with the "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"?

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:44:31 -0400

Court-ordered religious classes raise concerns

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Holly Salzman was hoping to get some help co-parenting her 11-year-old twin boys with her ex-husband. Instead she says she got 10 court-ordered religious sessions that she did not want.

“It’s very inappropriate,” Salzman said.

District Court ordered 10 classes through it’s Family Court Division. Family Court provides services in child custody cases to reduce conflict.

“To help us with our co-parenting as well as communication skills,” she said.

At the end of last year Salzman started attending the sessions.

“You don’t have a choice. You do it or you’re held in contempt of court,” Salzman said.

The court told Salzman she had to see Mary Pepper. She touts herself as an educator, a mentor and a teacher for couples. But Salzman says she was surprised by what else Pepper offered.

Handout

“I walked into the session and the very first thing she said to me was, ‘I start my sessions by praying,'” Salzman said. “When I expressed my concerns that I didn’t pray she said, ‘well this is what I do’ and she proceeded to say a prayer out loud.”

Salzman wondered how this did not cross the line between church and state. After that first meeting with Pepper, she says she left a message with Family Court staff, complaining about the religion. Salzman says she never heard back. She says the second session with Pepper opened with a prayer again.

“We went back to court. I expressed concerns again about the religious overtones and they stated they hadn’t heard any problems concerning Mary Pepper with religion,” Salzman said.

The single mother of two said she felt so “offended and disgusted” that she stopped going to the court-ordered sessions. The result was that the court took her kids away.

“It’s probably the worst thing I’ve ever been through in my life,” Salzman said.

To get her kids back she had to finish the classes.

Salzman said the religious pressure continued.

KRQE News 13 rolled undercover video and audio in the final three classes between Salzman and Pepper. There were several references of religion.

“The meaning in my life is to know love and serve God,” Pepper told Salzman in one of the meetings. “If you want to explore how God was in your past, how God was in your life and not in your life… I know you don’t believe in God which is fine but I know at some points he was in your life in some way.”

There were handouts with quotes of Psalms and other religious quotes. Pepper also gave her homework titled “who is God to me?”

“Every session there was some sort of religion that was intertwined with the sessions,” Salzman said.

“I’m a believer myself and if a person is open, we talk about God. If they’re not open, it’s a secular program that I provide,” Pepper said after KRQE News 13 caught up to her after a session.

Pepper said she doesn’t believe her program has religious overtones. She said Salzman was interested in religion early in their meetings and that’s why she brought it up.

“There was interested in analyzing her belief system. She asked me specifically… how do I understand spirituality, meaning and purpose and life,” Pepper said.

As for allegations of blurring the lines between church and state, Pepper said it shouldn’t matter that she mentions religion in a court-ordered program.

“I’m a private business that people decide to come through or not. The particular person there was interested in analyzing her belief system.,” she said.

The court does not pay for the sessions or run them but because they’re court ordered, the American Civil Liberties Union said there may be a problem.

“No one should be put in a position where they are forced to accept training or therapy that violates their own religious beliefs and morals,” said Peter Simonson, ACLU Executive Director.

The ACLU doesn’t know all the facts of this case but believes if the courts are funneling clients to religious-based counseling, it could violate the separation of church and state.

“We’ve got protections in our country under the Bill of Rights are intended to try and stop that,” Simonson said. “On the face of it, it looks pretty problematic.”

Simonson said he wanted to know how much the court knew about Pepper’s religious offerings in her program. KRQE News 13 wanted to know too, but court spokesperson Tim Korte said court employees could not comment on pending cases.

Korte said, “the court does not refer parties to religious-based counseling. Some of the counseling organizations where individuals are referred may offer optional religious counseling, but the individual is not ordered by the court to participate in the religious counseling.”

Pepper said 50-percent of her clients are referred from the court. She said has about 10 court-ordered clients a week. But Pepper said most people have no interest in spirituality and she said she leaves it out of the program.

But there are more red flags. Pepper holds her meetings inside public libraries.

“That way I can keep my costs down,” Pepper said.

But she’s not allowed to work in public libraries. City policy forbids the sale of products or services on library property.

Salzman says Pepper is aware of that– claiming she has her clients book the rooms in their names and pay her in cash.

“She had actually explained to me that you need to be discreet about it because I’m not allowed to exchange money in the public library. So I had to kind of hide the money and then literally pass the money under the table,” Salzman said.

Pepper wouldn’t tell KRQE News 13 about the cash payments.

“I think that this interview needs to be ended,” she said. “If you’d like to know more in private, I’d explain a lot about my business but to do this on the air is not appropriate.”

But Pepper never explained the payments off-camera.

Salzman got her kids back and finished her co-parenting classes.

“I got a certificate and I kicked my heels on the way out,” Salzman said

Response by PO1 Tony Holland made Sep 17 at 2015 9:50 AM

PO1 Tony Holland — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:50:11 -0400

This is exactly the sort of crap that should never be allowed.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Sep 17 at 2015 9:59 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:59:26 -0400

The Framers anticipated two or three People getting into a pissing contest and no judge being able to sort it out. There is no "reasonable" way to sort out a religious argument. There is no logical way to sort out an argument based on belief. Therefore they added a clause which just "ended" the argument (in theory).

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Sep 17 at 2015 10:06 AM

SSG Warren Swan — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:06:01 -0400

I feel for this woman. If she's going to parenting classes, the instructors religious views have no bearing on professional doctrine used in better parenting. But I'm gonna wait and see how long it takes Huckabee and Cruz to come running to her aid being she lost her kids to an immoral "instructor" rather than someone who just didn't want to do her job.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2015 10:30 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:30:43 -0400

It absolutely crosses the border between "church and state" but it sounds like there are a plethora of other issues with this counselor, and involuntary praying is a very minor part of the problem.

I've been to counselors who pray, but that was by choice. As mentioned, the court can't order you to participate in something religiously affiliated.

Response by SGT David T. made Sep 17 at 2015 10:30 AM

SGT David T. — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:30:52 -0400

I can understand mandating the counseling but that counseling should not be religious in nature unless the individual desires it.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2015 11:34 AM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 11:34:20 -0400

First off is it isn't religiously affiliated. Nothing says this counselor can't mention faith in her sessions. And honestly...a prayer is so offensive to her that she was willing to lose her kids over it? I am a believer and pray regularly. If my counselor walked in with a satan shirt on, and said God isn't real I would just ignore him and press on. If prayer truly offends you...if WORDS truly offend you...then you have bigger issues going on.

Response by MAJ Keira Brennan made Sep 17 at 2015 2:38 PM

MAJ Keira Brennan — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 14:38:34 -0400

This is BS - unadulterated BS - Sharia law in Christian guise

Response by Capt Jeff S. made Dec 15 at 2015 2:58 PM

Capt Jeff S. — Tue, 15 Dec 2015 14:58:38 -0500

I think our Founding Fathers were against creating a "Church of the State" i.e., something akin to the Anglican church in England. They were not against prayer in schools, or opening government up with prayer. The First Amendment protects freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

People's desire to practice their religion should not be restricted simply because others don't agree with it. Those who don't agree with prayer don't have to pray. It's that simple. What's wrong with our society today is that we are offended by everything and everyone else who doesn't think like us, and we let the minority of perpetually offended people dictate what we can and can't do. It's time we as American's dumped political correctness in favor of common sense and decency.

With that said, clearly Pepper went too far. She knowingly conducted her business in a public library, which she knew was wrong, and was having her clients reserve the space to save money? Who's? She avoided paying rent on an office [which would have generated tax revenues] and she insisted on cash payments, which looks bad and smells of impropriety. The potential for defrauding the government of tax money (directly and/or indirectly) certainly was there and so is the temptation to not claim income. As Christians we are commanded to render to Caesar what is Caesar's.

Bottom line, what she did was wrong. She did not present a good Christian witness!

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Apr 25 at 2019 12:02 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Thu, 25 Apr 2019 12:02:21 -0400

So a divorced Holly Salzman is running around asking for help in Co-parenting her sons with the boys father and a judge steps in and orders her to take ten region classes with her sons............so what's the real problem here? Is it the fact that Salzman doesn't know how to pray or she wasn't paying attention to her parents when they were raising her? The classes seem open ended to me in that you can attend and its a discovery session about what you believe in. A communications class that teaches you something about yourself. Not a bad deal at all

Response by LTC David Brown made Dec 30 at 2020 6:49 PM

LTC David Brown — Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:49:56 -0500

The problem I see is court ordered counseling involving religion. I am a Christian but faith should stay out of this, or if some one objects the counselors should be sensitive to the objection. Having gone through a divorce decades ago and having to spend week ends and money on this crap I find it disgusting anyway.