Criminal cases, as far as I know are those that are (or can be) harmful in any aspects (physical, emotional, etc). Teaching about hell does not inflict harm to anyone.
Sorry, but I must differ. There is such a thing as abusive teaching about hell. It does happen and it must be warded against. Quite fortunately, it is generally speaking rare.
What makes it harmful is the manner of how it is being taught. E.g, "All of those that are non members of our church will go to hell" and stuff like that. Those things can be managed within the organizations (church) or individuals (parent, children) involved, even without involving the law.
Sure. They can, and they usually are.
Then again, law is by its very nature meant for the exceptions, for the failures of individual judgement.
But the sticking point is that most of the damage is in fact caused by parents and priests. It is less a matter of how it is taught than of by whom and with which intensity and respite.
Also, if you don't believe in hell, how can that be a form of harassment? Let's say for instance, I grow up not believing in after life then all of a sudden, someone would approach me and say that I should repent or else I'll go to hell, would that make an impact to me considering the fact that I don't believe in it?
Most likely not. But again, we are talking about formative situations here.
So what's the use of having it declared as a criminal offense if a lot of people doesn't see it as a form of harassment?
So that people who are not in that lot or are too immature to realize that they are being harassed (which includes nearly all children up to a certain age) may be protected from the lack of wisdom and/or emotional stability of their parents and other adult figures, of course.
Another thing is that heaven, hell, etc is part of the teachings of the church (especially the Christian Churches). The government cannot/does not have any "power" to restrict (or declare it as a criminal offense) the teachings about hell because there is a separation between the church and state.
That much is true, but it works both ways. No Church (or parent) should expect to get away with otherwise criminal behavior out of claims that it is religiously motivated.
The State is supposed to not even try to decide if something has religious significance or not. It is expected to allow or restrain things out of their own merits, regardless of how sacred some people might consider them. That is much the same rationale that allows for the imprisonment of terrorists and psychopaths that swear to be following God's Will.
Both function differently. If the government will declare that preaching about hell is actually a criminal offense, then it would seem that they are actually trying to "touch" a function of the church. If they do that, then they're breaking the law of the separation of church and state.
I agree that it shouldn't. But that is not what I am talking about.
