Religious instruction is child abuse

[Complexity]

You have evidence for any of these claims? The overwhelming majority of people in this forum have come from a background that included at least some religious education and it does not cripple their ability to think rationally or hamper their capacity for independent thought as you seem to imply.

In fact, this whole line of argument includes an unspoken premise that people are completely helpless against "religious indocrination", that once exposed to it it will forever dominate their lives. Given the historical fact that Christianity once controlled most of Western Civ, and once had enough power to torture and main their opponents at will, dictate policy to governments and kings, and control armies and wage wars and now they don't, that's not a supportable premise.

Once again, this whole argument is nothing more than a blatant appeal to emotion (fear, specifically).

I disagree, of course.

I haven't said that religious belief is inescapable, or that the injury that it does to reason and the rest is total, but the time spent under its influence could have been spent better, and a mind fettered by it could have been doing more and doing it better.

 

[Complexity]

Not even good little critical thinkers?

I'll tell you something, C- kids have to be "indoctrinated" into something, because left to themselves humans are ignorant, violent, selfish and mean little animals who will make up a "worldview" that justifies thoes values and behaviors at the drop of a hat. I've never once met a child of lax parents that wasn't a monster.

Where do you think these awful religious worldviews to which you so strenuously object came from? They were gradually invented and refined by generations of ignorant, violent, selfish and mean humans left to themselves.

Nonsense.

 

[Piscivore]

I disagree, of course.

I haven't said that religious belief is inescapable, or that the injury that it does to reason and the rest is total, but the time spent under its influence could have been spent better, and a mind fettered by it could have been doing more and doing it better.

That's quite a retreat from "Religious instruction is child abuse".

In any case, "better" is a subjective judgement. One that you might want to make for other people, but simply don't get to. If the absence of religious education were objectively "better" than religious education it wouldn't be taking so long for people to give it up. Instead, we have people that have positive memories of it. People that feel that it has done them some good. People who want to do the best they can for their kids just like you and me... and yet somehow, mysteriously, still "indoctrinate" them.

If you have some objective, empirical evidence to support your claim that religious instruction is doing real, objective harm to children as HIV or child abuse does, or even that it is "better" not to have it, present this evidence.

 

[Piscivore]

Nonsense.

What is?

 

[NewtonTrino]

Again, I am not advocating punishing these parents or taking their children from them. I am advocating calling a thing what it is - damaging and potential limiting to the child.

/agree

 

[Nursedan]

Is this thread just here to satisfy Complexity's boredom? Make an inflammatory statement that includes the comparison of religious teachings equalling the worst disease there is, and then slowly backing away from this as the thread progresses?

I sense so much anger with you, Complexity. You seem to genuinely hate religious people. If you had kids, (my understanding is you don't) then you might understand this differently. Kids need direction. Parents should provide direction for them. Religious people think they're doing the best for their kids, period. Not to piss you off.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

you must be so proud.
How is a three year old free to choose? He lives on your every word and you've chosen to fill his mind with mumbo jumbo because you feel morally obliged too. Religion is a tumour in the box of human ideas. Still as long as you feel good, eh, don't worry if it's child abuse.
I think anyone who hands their kids over to religious people are aiding and abetting child abuse, for instance, how could anyone leave a kid alone in the presence of a catholic priest when all the evidence points to the fact he's probably a child abuser. You wouldn't take him to a gary glitter gig and then take him back stage to meet the man, would you?

Crikey! How is a three year old free to choose anything, one may wonder?
Of course they may choose to hurt someone by stabbing them with a fork, but let's not curtail their free choice to do so because we think it's wrong.

Every parent is morally obliged to raise their children in the way they think is the best. It would be a sad world where parents are not able to share their beliefs with their offspring, because some totalitarian atheists wish to dictate the rules.

Ever read Brave New World? 1984? Perhaps we could install cameras in the houses of the religious, to make sure that the kids don't get funny ideas. Oh, but I just dropped a bottle of sauce on my foot and exclaimed 'Jesus Christ!' Am I in trouble now with Atheist Enforcement?

 

[NewtonTrino]

Is this thread just here to satisfy Complexity's boredom? Make an inflammatory statement that includes the comparison of religious teachings equalling the worst disease there is, and then slowly backing away from this as the thread progresses?

I sense so much anger with you, Complexity. You seem to genuinely hate religious people. If you had kids, (my understanding is you don't) then you might understand this differently. Kids need direction. Parents should provide direction for them. Religious people think they're doing the best for their kids, period. Not to piss you off.

I believe that they think they are doing the correct thing. That doesn't make it correct though.

 

[Nursedan]

I believe that they think they are doing the correct thing. That doesn't make it correct though.

Their action or their belief?

You are not the arbiter of what is correct and what is not. What you said could be true of anyone, including atheists!

 

[bookitty]

I am divided on this subject. On one hand, general religious instruction within the home can be a bonding experience, a shortcut to teaching morality and tie to our verbal folklore past. Church can act as community. Many of the older churches have beautiful services with a tie to history. Understanding the Bible is necessary from an anthropological standpoint. These can all be positive benefits to society.

On the other hand, I've been nearly deaf in one ear since I was six-years-old because my freaking Christian Scientist mother tried to pray away an ear infection.

I almost wish that religion could be seen as a privilege, not a right. A freedom that isn't taken for granted and that was heavily regulated for abuse. But that is unconstitutional and would be imposing my own beliefs on others.

 

[Complexity]

That's quite a retreat from "Religious instruction is child abuse".

In any case, "better" is a subjective judgement. One that you might want to make for other people, but simply don't get to. If the absence of religious education were objectively "better" than religious education it wouldn't be taking so long for people to give it up. Instead, we have people that have positive memories of it. People that feel that it has done them some good. People who want to do the best they can for their kids just like you and me... and yet somehow, mysteriously, still "indoctrinate" them.

If you have some objective, empirical evidence to support your claim that religious instruction is doing real, objective harm to children as HIV or child abuse does, or even that it is "better" not to have it, present this evidence.

No, I haven't retreated from the position that religious instruction is child abuse.

I simply don't think that anything will be done about it.

You truly don't get it, do you?

People don't keep having tapeworms because it is adventageous for us to have tapeworms - people keep having tapeworms because we're part of an ecological niche and it is adventageous for tapeworms to keep having tapeworms.

People are hosts to religious and other ideas. Some of us call them memes (which apparently upsets someone or other in this thread).

It is difficult to get rid of religious ideas because those ideas get well rooted in minds and are protected by other memes, memes that distrust reason and science. These memes propagate to other hosts, ad nauseum.

That is all that religion is, in reality.

Of course, 'better' is subjective. It is related to values, and I don't think there is any objective basis for or source of values, ethics, or morals.

Nonetheless, I have my own values, ethics, and morals, one's that I've woven over fifty years, and all of my thoughts, actions, and choices are based in them.

I'll give some thought to your demand for evidence. I have none at hand. Of course, I don't have any evidence at hand for anything.

I wonder if we would ever agree on what constitutes evidence for these assertions?

Nonetheless, I'll give it some thought.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

I disagree, of course.

I haven't said that religious belief is inescapable, or that the injury that it does to reason and the rest is total, but the time spent under its influence could have been spent better, and a mind fettered by it could have been doing more and doing it better.

What have you based this view on, though? When I go to church it provides a space and time where the emphasis is on self-reflection, loving other people and being caring and giving. Why is this such a waste of time?

Now, let me be clear - I'm not saying that atheists are more selfish than religious folk, but I am saying that in my case at least, religion does help me to focus on the important things in my life. I'm also not saying that this cannot be done without religion, but I am making the point that the time I spend in church is well spent. Although it often drags me away from the football...

 

[Complexity]

Not even good little critical thinkers?

I'll tell you something, C- kids have to be "indoctrinated" into something, because left to themselves humans are ignorant, violent, selfish and mean little animals who will make up a "worldview" that justifies thoes values and behaviors at the drop of a hat. I've never once met a child of lax parents that wasn't a monster.

(I had replied 'Nonsense' and asked what was nonsense)

I don't think that kids have to be indoctrinated. I think they have to be raised and educated. I don't think that that must or ought to include indoctrination.

I don't think that parents who don't indoctrinate are lax parents.

I do think that actually educating a child and sharing your values and opinions with it in a responsible way over time is more work and requires more skill than indoctrination.

Where do you think these awful religious worldviews to which you so strenuously object came from? They were gradually invented and refined by generations of ignorant, violent, selfish and mean humans left to themselves.

The 'left to themselves' part triggered my earlier response of 'Nonsense'.

Yes, people came up with all of the garbage that I object to. They did it because they were people, not because they were people 'left to themselves'.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I disagree with you, of course, as I expect to. We don't see eye-to-eye on this subject at all.

True.

This may be due to our experiences being different, and due to the immense variability and intensity of said upbringing. It ain't all the same.

DR

 

[Complexity]

What have you based this view on, though? When I go to church it provides a space and time where the emphasis is on self-reflection, loving other people and being caring and giving. Why is this such a waste of time?

Now, let me be clear - I'm not saying that atheists are more selfish than religious folk, but I am saying that in my case at least, religion does help me to focus on the important things in my life. I'm also not saying that this cannot be done without religion, but I am making the point that the time I spend in church is well spent. Although it often drags me away from the football...

I think creating space for self reflection, loving other people, and being caring and giving is great! It is not a waste of time.

Of course, I didn't say that it was.

Why do you appear to believe that in order to do these good things you must believe in supernatural beings and fairy tales?

Why do you appear to need the promise of reward and the threat of punishment to do these good things?

Why don't you enjoy them and practice them because of what they give you and how they make you feel without the charade of religion?

Are you unaware that there are other, better ways of living?

Do what you will, but please don't pretend that one must be religious to self-reflect, love other people, care, and give.

That they create the space and time (and pass the plate) may be making it too easy for you to remain stuck in their way of being rather than looking around and finding a better way.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

Of course, 'better' is subjective. It is related to values, and I don't think there is any objective basis for or source of values, ethics, or morals.

Nonetheless, I have my own values, ethics, and morals, one's that I've woven over fifty years, and all of my thoughts, actions, and choices are based in them.

So in your view, would it be right for you to raise your children using those values, ethics and morals, which you admit have no objective basis?

 

[Malerin]

Oh, the irony.

As Bart says, the ironing is delicious.

 

[Complexity]

True.

This may be due to our experiences being different, and due to the immense variability and intensity of said upbringing. It ain't all the same.

DR

I know.

But it does all involve belief in supernatural forces, submission to an authority (or its real representatives), yielding another's (real person, possibly writer/interpretor of scriptor, intermediary) will for your own, abdication of the creation and responsibility for one's moral system, etc.

It also inevitably results in conflicts between a realistic view of reality and a superstitious and woo one and builds in a bias to prefer the woo way.

 

[Malerin]

I regard requiring children to sing national anthems and say pledges to a flag, or to place them in awkward situations when they do not take part in these activities, to be wrong.

Like being adopted by same sex couples?

 

[KingMerv00]

Like being adopted by same sex couples?

*Puts a lid on the box*