Is it child abuse to raise your child to believe in your religion?

[Beth]

Recently, there have been several discussion about whether or parents raising their children to understand and hopefully believe in the same religion they do constitutes child abuse. Dawkins has articulated this point of view, so it tends to come up in threads about him such as this one:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82150

In post 83, Gayak says

Today, one of the major stumbling blocks to a child's healthy development is caused by religions. It is time to refine the laws again to include religious indoctrination as a form of child abuse.

So I thought I'd see just how common this point of view is.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

I am very wary of the idea of legislating against such indoctrination. It's all happy time deciding what people can and can't teach their children... so long as you're the one making the decisions.

 

[cgallaga]

I agree with the illustrous Marquis. And I have met too many lapsed religious to agree that this is effective indoctrination, or that most any of it is actually abusive. Its like legislating against the tooth fairy.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I voted but feel this poll lacked enough choices.

I think everyone here would feel that watching your child die of appendicitis while praying over him is child abuse that should be stopped, and I think that everyone here would agree that there are some religious groups that being raised in is not a problem, say unitarians or quaker meeting.

I also think that most people think that taking children away from their parents because of their parents ideology has great potential for abuse.

The problem is that in the intersections and boundaries between these three facts is where it becomes hard to decide.

 

[This Guy]

I think most religious teaching is not abusive to the children. There are of course exceptions.

But to try to restrict a parent from teaching their child the tenants of their religion would be wrong IMHO.

Obviously if the religious "teaching" includes anything physically harmful, or mentally/emotionally harmful something should be done. But while I disagree with teaching fairy tales as truth, I think a believing parent should have that right.

 

[Bob Klase]

I am very wary of the idea of legislating against such indoctrination. It's all happy time deciding what people can and can't teach their children... so long as you're the one making the decisions.

Absolutely.

As much as I dislike seeing kids brainwashed by religion, it would be very easy for them to make a case that not teaching your children about god constitutes child abuse (not a good case admittedly, but as good as the one they make for the religion in the first place). The first amendment (at least in theory) protects us as well as them.

 

[PrincessIneffabelle]

If you're talking about the middle-of-the-road type of religion I was raised with, I think it is not abusive. If you're talking about a religion in which a child is being physically harmed, either through action or inaction, I think it is abusive.

I also think that some religions can be conducive to (if not downright encouraging of) verbal and mental abuse, especially of girls. This is just my opinion; I don't really know how verbal and mental abuse rates in religious homes compare to the rates in non-religious homes, but I would be interested in seeing some data on it.

 

[Miss Anthrope]

Even though I think religion can be a bad thing, I wouldn't go so far as venture into the realms of thought crime. That's way, way too Stalin or Mao for me. I wouldn't want to live in a society that told you what to think by government mandate.

The only exception for me is the teaching of evolution. As a homeschooling parent I see far, far too many parents refusing to teach this. To me I think it completely handicaps a child's ability to understand fundamental science--and that borders on a kind of neglect to me.

 

[tkingdoll]

I'm extremely biased because I only have my own experiences to go by (a grieving child, having just lost a parent, is exorcised because her emotional problems are caused by "a possesion of demons") and I categorise those as child abuse.

However, I suspect that making religion taboo to a child makes it more attractive as an adult. Rebelling against parental/childhood beliefs is what makes many a non-religous person, IMHO. I'd say leave well alone - you have the right to educate your child in whatever way you see fit as long as they are learning to read and write too.

 

[tsg]

As much as I'd like to see religion disappear, the absolute last thing I want to do is give the government (any government) the power to tell anyone what they can and can't believe.

I'm also firmly of the opinion that if you want to restrict the freedoms of individuals, you had better have a verifiably good reason for doing so.

Until you can show that religious belief is detrimental to children, you don't have an argument.

 

[Belz...]

Is teaching your children that we only use 10% of our brains child abuse ?

No.

Is it dumb ?

Yes.

Same difference.

 

[skeptifem]

I didnt vote because my opinion isnt up there.

I think it can be, but is not always. Just like physical force or words used to disipline kids can be abusive, but arent inherently abusive. it depends on how far things go.

 

[LawnOven]

I voted the first one. But my opinions are more complex than that. I doubt one can argue that all religious teaching is child abuse. What about passing on political opinions... or anything else? Seems dangerous to claim child abuse out and out.

 

[bigred]

Recently, there have been several discussion about whether or parents raising their children to understand and hopefully believe in the same religion they do constitutes child abuse.

At JREF? shocking!

Yes, raising your child with beliefs you believe to be correct/best is certainly abusive.

Course that means atheists who raise their child to believe there is no God are also being "abusive" - or is this another one of those selective logic things -

 

[dglas]

This is a tough one for me.

It seems to me that maintaining diversity of opinions and attitudes is as important in a social context as maintaining biodiversity is in an environmental one. Regulating attitudes and views seems to me a way of severely restricting possibilities. Mind you, religious sorts in the past have not been sympathetic to this kind of view. If anything strives for homogeneity of thought, it is religion.

However, I do think that when God-based religions tell children that they are intrinsically evil, they are teaching them to hate themselves and each other - in fact all of humanity. Worse, they are teaching children that they want to be evil. No amount of restipulation of "love" through a deity can counter the harm this kind of understanding does. In fact, it reinforces it. It represents very real emotional strife and disenfranchisement from ourselves and each other. I do call that abuse.

Other than offering deprogramming services, after the damage is done, what can we do about it that won't systematically inhibit diversity of thought?

 

[LawnOven]

At JREF? shocking!

Yes, raising your child with beliefs you believe to be correct/best is certainly abusive.

Course that means atheists who raise their child to believe there is no God are also being "abusive" - or is this another one of those selective logic things -

What about raising them to hate and hate with action? Even if you think those are the best values. Might that be abusive?

 

[Jon.]

Teaching your child what you believe is fine. Refusing to allow them to be exposed to other beliefs is abuse. Somewhere in the middle there's a line that gets very difficult to draw, and that's why I didn't vote. Like so many other things in life, this is not a black-or-white issue, but rather an infinite number of shades of grey.

 

[ponderingturtle]

If you're talking about the middle-of-the-road type of religion I was raised with, I think it is not abusive. If you're talking about a religion in which a child is being physically harmed, either through action or inaction, I think it is abusive.

How do you determine what is middle of the road? Is it one that says only homosexual acts are sinful, not that any homosexual inclination marks you as the devils spawn?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Even though I think religion can be a bad thing, I wouldn't go so far as venture into the realms of thought crime. That's way, way too Stalin or Mao for me. I wouldn't want to live in a society that told you what to think by government mandate.

The only exception for me is the teaching of evolution. As a homeschooling parent I see far, far too many parents refusing to teach this. To me I think it completely handicaps a child's ability to understand fundamental science--and that borders on a kind of neglect to me.

So you would favor forcing every child to have some sort of state mandated curriculum? Sure evolution is a major issue, but there are plenty of others in many areas that can also prove damaging.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

At JREF? shocking!

Yes, raising your child with beliefs you believe to be correct/best is certainly abusive.

Course that means atheists who raise their child to believe there is no God are also being "abusive" - or is this another one of those selective logic things -

You might want to take a look at the poll results thus far. Most have responded in the negative, and even the majority of those voting yes have selected the option that it should not be prevented.