Religious instruction is child abuse

[Complexity]

I think that religious instruction is child abuse and should be regarded as such.

I think that it is morally akin to deliberately exposing a child to HIV.

I'm under no illusion that we'll be able to prevent or even reduce religious indoctrination, but I think we need to hold those who do it accountable and never let them forget the damage that they are doing to their own and other people's children.

 

[supermanlives]

What would you suggest?

How can we, as atheists, make it illegal to indoctrinate kids? I'm all for a good idea, but I haven't heard nor seen one.

 

[Complexity]

What would you suggest?

How can we, as atheists, make it illegal to indoctrinate kids? I'm all for a good idea, but I haven't heard nor seen one.

I don't think we can, and I don't think that attempts at prohibition could be successful.

I am, however, so sick of the smarmy smugness which so many of the religious boast about the 'moral upbringing' and 'proper religious education' that they are inflicting on their offspring, of the sunday school teachers who think that indoctrination is a cause for praise, of religious people who think that indoctrination into their own peculiar religous beliefs should be inflicted upon everyone else's children, either through force of law, imposition of the majoritarian will, or simply by sneaking it into schools, classes, and textbooks.

I want to shove these bastards off the moral high ground that they claim for their own.

 

[Nursedan]

Another strongly worded post by Complexity!

Not sure about the HIV comparison, since there are people (myself included) who were raised in the church then backed away slowly and let rationality prevail.

Did something happen recently that provoked your palpable anger?

 

[The True Scotsman]

I think that religious instruction is child abuse and should be regarded as such.

I think that it is morally akin to deliberately exposing a child to HIV.

I'm under no illusion that we'll be able to prevent or even reduce religious indoctrination, but I think we need to hold those who do it accountable and never let them forget the damage that they are doing to their own and other people's children.

I wouldn't agree with all applications of your first sentence. It depends on the situation. One could consider some indoctrination such as indoctrination into extreme fundamentalism (ie teaching your children that: the earth is flat, God magically create everything 6000 years ago (or whatever their number is), etc) as child abuse by grossly distorting the child's view of the world, but I find it hard to say that indoctrination into an extremely liberal faith (ie God create the singularity before the big bang and then let the universe do whatever it wanted to (evolution as it is understood included), God doesn't interfere with this world but only the next world, the bible should be taken metaphorically, etc) is child abuse. Also, I believe it must be taken into account whether the parents believe the claims or not, as in one case the parents are intentionally teaching their children false beliefs, while in the other case a question might rather be raised, not about abuse, but rather about the mental capacity of the parents and their fitness to raise a child.

 

[rjh01]

I think it is a matter of degree. A little religious instruction is harmless, but complete brainwashing is harmful to the child and should be treated as child abuse. It is a matter of where you draw the line. Please remember too that the majority of the people identify themselves with a religion of some sort. So it would be almost impossible to make religious instruction illegal.

 

[MG1962]

so you would consider other forms of indoctrination the same way. MAKING children sing national anthems, or pledges to flags etc etc?

 

[Democracy Simulator]

Sadly, there are many cases of physical and emotional abuse of children - religious parents and institutions are as liable to this as anyone and anything else. Yet to suggest that all religious instruction is abusive is a claim that is not backed up by the evidence.

I agree with Complexity to the extent that I am also fed up with holier-than-thou attitudes, smugness and excessive preachiness of certain Christians. All I can say is that they have a very different understanding of how to follow Jesus than I do. I am also baffled by religious people who do not see the benefits of secular government in protecting their freedom to worship.

I sat in the garden the other day and my 3 year-old son came up to me and whispered into my ear, 'God Loves You'. This was obviously something he had taken from the church we go to. To say that it was a special moment is an understatement. I admit that I am dismayed that someone may consider this 'morally akin' to deliberately exposing someone to HIV. Like many parents, I want what is best for my kids. I want them to thrive and be strong and loving. For me, God is part of that plan, so I am morally obliged to share this with my kids. Of course they are free to disagree and find a different way from mine.

As long as they don't become fundies!

 

[MG1962]

I agree with Complexity to the extent that I am also fed up with holier-than-thou attitudes, smugness and excessive preachiness of certain Christians. All I can say is that they have a very different understanding of how to follow Jesus than I do. I am also baffled by religious people who do not see the benefits of secular government in protecting their freedom to worship.

Yes that is definately one of the less attractive sides of some Christians. And I agree I dont understand the value in the attitude. It should never be about being a better Christian than the next guy, but about being the best Christian you can

 

[wollery]

Well said Complexity, but you fall far short of the mark.

I say that all parental instruction is child abuse. I mean, seriously, how many parents teach their children utter untruths?

No, what we should do is remove all children from their parents at birth and teach them the real truth^TM. And the teachers must be carefully chosen from amongst the ranks of those who know best.

I nominate Complexity as the great arbiter of all that is true and good. He'll set the curriculum and choose the teachers who will raise the new generation of critical thinking atheists. That'll solve all the problems in the world.

 

[BobHaulk]

Sadly, there are many cases of physical and emotional abuse of children - religious parents and institutions are as liable to this as anyone and anything else. Yet to suggest that all religious instruction is abusive is a claim that is not backed up by the evidence.

I agree with Complexity to the extent that I am also fed up with holier-than-thou attitudes, smugness and excessive preachiness of certain Christians. All I can say is that they have a very different understanding of how to follow Jesus than I do. I am also baffled by religious people who do not see the benefits of secular government in protecting their freedom to worship.

I sat in the garden the other day and my 3 year-old son came up to me and whispered into my ear, 'God Loves You'. This was obviously something he had taken from the church we go to. To say that it was a special moment is an understatement. I admit that I am dismayed that someone may consider this 'morally akin' to deliberately exposing someone to HIV. Like many parents, I want what is best for my kids. I want them to thrive and be strong and loving. For me, God is part of that plan, so I am morally obliged to share this with my kids. Of course they are free to disagree and find a different way from mine.

As long as they don't become fundies!

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?

 

[Radrook]

What would you suggest?

How can we, as atheists, make it illegal to indoctrinate kids? I'm all for a good idea, but I haven't heard nor seen one.

Aren't kids indoctrinated at school?

 

[bluesjnr]

I think giving a child enough balanced information to form their own opinion is healthy. Surely it would be wrong to indoctrinate/instruct/educate only one view?

I haven't seen any evidence that, here in Scotland, children are forced into religion or into accepting the creationist description of events. If they are being then it certainly failed where my son is concerned.

 

[westprog]

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?

The extremes of religious fundamentalism are fairly visible, and the nutcases are obviously out there. The anti-religious craziness isn't as visible in the Real World, but it's reassuring to see that it's there all right.

 

[MG1962]

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.

What evidence?

 

[Mister Agenda]

There is no alternative to allowing parently to raise their children as best they know how, short of actionable abuse, that isn't worse than the problem. Gentle persuasion is all we have here.

 

[Complexity]

Another strongly worded post by Complexity!

Not sure about the HIV comparison, since there are people (myself included) who were raised in the church then backed away slowly and let rationality prevail.

Did something happen recently that provoked your palpable anger?

A person giving religious instruction is doing so from a position of authority - s/he is a parent, or teacher, or some adult or teen charged with that responsibility.

This person is attempting to install some version of religious woo in the kid's head. If successful, the effect of that woo, that complex of memes, will be not only to cause that kid to believe a bunch of patent nonsense, but it greatly reduces the chance that that kid will ever be able to receive some competing clusters of memes that include the mechanisms and values of reason, logic, curiosity, desire to understand, hunger for truth, and science (to name a few).

Not only is the kid infested with religious and woo-supportive memes, but s/he is infested with memes that will actively 'protect' the kid from the things that many of us value and regard as essential to a good life.

HIV comparison - is it justified?

In terms of the serious damage and loss of potential that religious indoctrination can do, the increase in susceptibility to other woo, the resistance to reason and other protective memes, and the difficulty in eradicating it, I think it is a valid comparison.

As to the parent's intent, it doesn't really matter - the child is severely damaged and intellectually wounded all the same. If the parent didn't understand what could happen, s/he should have before trying to shove woo down the kid's throat.

Must run off to work. I'll read and respond later.

I visited my parents this weekend and heard about other family. That will always get me fired up on this topic.

 

[supermanlives]

What about in the case where one parent believes (although not 'fundamentalist' belief) and the other is an atheist? What do you do then?

 

[Darth Rotor]

I think that religious instruction is child abuse and should be regarded as such.

Nope.

Your HIV analogy is unfortunately marred by the problem of HIV being with you forever, once you get it, and religious education and rearing, which has immense variability in intensity and influence, being discardable at pretty much any age.

Your attempt at moral equivalence doesn't work, unless you wish to create new and innovative definitions for the term "child abuse" in your quest for brushes with which you'd like to tar somebody.

DR

 

[Sophronius]

I think that it is morally akin to deliberately exposing a child to HIV.

This seems very unfair to me. If the parents were deliberately indoctrinating children with lies and harmful ideas (perhaps trying to raise them to be terrorists) then the comparison might be valid. However, seeing how those parents live in a society where religion is often encouraged and generally seen as a good or at least neutral thing, I can't really blame them.

In fact, you could say that those parents have likely been indoctrinated to teach those beliefs themselves. That should at least give them some special consideration.