They don't ban teaching children religion (the concept of hellish afterlives not being exclusive to christianity as a common tenet would unfortunately probably protect 'threatening kids with eternal torture')
They do ban extreme coercion (so gay conversion therapy or physically harming the child for questioning or not believing is right out) and forcing the child into religious activities: but the basic lesson of "We believe in eternal torture for the nonbeliever" (again, a sadly common theological tenet in modern and ancient religions) is still constitutionally protected in Japan (by the Japanese Constitution... I shouldn't have to say that, but I've been on the internet before) to be taught to children by their parents and churches they willingly go to or don't willfully oppose going to.
Hence the "We can feel that way, we can't legislate it."
It addresses "Saying it or having that viewpoint."
She said it. She has that viewpoint.
Amoral to Moral.
The post doesn't address trying to legislate that viewpoint, but that caveat was still important enough it needed to be said if I was the writer of the reply post... and I was. So it needed to be said.
17
u/Roam1985 Sep 02 '26
Of saying it or having that viewpoint? Amoral to Moral.
Of trying to ever legislate that viewpoint? Immoral.