I’m not Christian, I’m atheist. However, I was subjected to much of standard Christian indoctrination at school. I grew up believing that for all the nonsense of their belief in mumbo jumbo, Christians were basically decent people. Should a Christian obtain funds for nothing, which is what Mason did (according to above)? Is it really any better than theft? Both involve getting something for nothing at the expense of others. Theft is illegal..we mad a law. Is it morally worse than what Mason does? Is it really Christian to be a money grabber? Maybe it is; it is morally questionable (like most advertising..the Atheist Bus Campaign and the recent Humanist campaign were clear exceptions. They were not designed to rip people off, but to inform).

As J Sutton said above, “They are not Christian children but the children of christian parents”. They have a right to make free choices when they are intellectually mature enough to do so. They should not be indoctrinated, as perhaps they have been.

Whoever said it was “their Christianity shining etc.” is probably ill..or a joker. Ongoing research in genetics/psychology seems to be showing there is a religious/gullibility gene. The sooner the research reaches a firm conclusion (and I feel it will clearly show the gene creates an abnormality) the sooner religious people can be treated for their illness. (Just a little tongue in cheek..but only a little!)