In what has to be a first in American legal history, a Maryland court this week accepted a stipulation as part of a plea agreement that charges against Ria Ramkissoon for the starvation of her son would be dropped once he was resurrected.
Ramkissoon is a member of a religious group, called 1 Mind Ministries, that has been implicated in coercing the woman to deprive the child of food and water because he refused to say “amen” over meals. The group’s leader, a 40-year-old woman calling herself “Queen Antoinette” declared the boy a demon and allegedly ordered the actions which led to his starvation.
The group has also convinced her that the child’s death is okay, because he will be resurrected – something Ramkissoon still believes to this day. It was clarified in court this week that the “resurrection clause” would require a true bodily revival and not a “perceived reincarnation.”
After the child’s death in 2006, the body was placed in a suitcase with mothballs and dryer sheets, and was left in a back room for a over a year while Ramkissoon and others awaited the resurrection promised by Queen Antoinette. It was discovered in 2008 after the group traveled across the country, leaving the suitcase behind.
Ramkissoon’s lawyer, Steven Silver, was clear that this clause was “very important to her”, and was apparently essential to her agreeing to a guilty plea. In exchange, she must testify against four other members of 1 Mind Ministries relating to charges including first-degree murder. She is expected to receive a 20 year sentence which will be suspended, and be compelled to undergo deprogramming and psychiatric therapy.
Silver describes his client’s state of mind in demanding the clause;
“She certainly recognizes that her omissions caused the death of her son. To this day, she believes it was God’s will and he will be resurrected and this will all take care of itself. She realizes if she’s wrong, then everyone has to take responsibility … and if she’s wrong, then she’s a failure as a mother and the worst thing imaginable has happened. I don’t think that, mentally, she’s ready to accept that.”
And yet, she was mentally ready to accept her child being starved to death because he was a demon? She was mentally ready to accept that he would be resurrected by the same power that commanded his murder?
The court has found her competent to stand trial, but is clearly treating her as if she is not criminally liable for her own actions. If she were claiming she was commanded to starve her child by voices in her own head, or her dog, would she still be treated the same way?
From the naive single mother to the judicial system – why do we expect, perhaps even excuse, insane behavior when it is advocated by a person claiming spiritual authority?
At the end of the day, all religious groups are cults. Some preach peace and love, others preach hatred and death. Some elevate freedom of thought and discovering one’s own divine plan, others demand subservience and equate knowingly and willingly rejecting truth with enlightenment. Simply said, some religions are better than others… unfortunately, most of them are pretty bad.
As long as we continue to hold mere religiosity as a virtue, regardless of the substance of the religion or group in question, we will tacitly endorse this sort of appalling behavior alongside all the benefits of faith.
We can do ourselves a huge favor by eliminating the benefit of the doubt for religious people – from now on, if you want to guide your entire life according to mythology, you had better be able to prove a significant benefit for yourself and society as a result. Finally, it’s time to stop believing nonsense when you know better, just because it’s part of your chosen religion… otherwise, you’re just as bad as this woman who is still waiting for her dead baby to come back to life.
Add A Comment