|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
 Posted - 07/24/2011 : 11:05:12
|
In the 1st August issue of the Watchtower magazine published by the the Watchtower and Bible tract society of New york ( Jehovah's witnesses) it states "Children need to be taught the truth about God. Where can they learn that truth? From the most respected religious book in the world the Bible."
The Christian courier states :"As a general rule, however, the person who truly believes in God, and who has some sense of the moral principles set forth in the Bible, is a better person. He is less to be feared in the neighborhood, and is more likely to be a savoring influence in his community."http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/411-the-connection-between-religion-and-morality
Other authors disagree Marc Hauser and Pete Singer disagree:
http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/publications/recent/HauserSingerMoralRelig05.pdf
Other authors point to the fact that animals in nature don't dreive their moral behaviour to their fellow creatures through belief in a deity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality_without_religion
My own belief is that if religion is taught it should be to teach all belief systems, including atheism and agnosticism, without indoctinating a child in any particular one. That way when a child grows up she or he can make a better informed decision as to what they believe.
What do other subscribers to this forum think? Should religious indoctrination of children be reclassified as child abuse?
Best wishes to religious fundamentalists, paranoid delusionalists ( sorry the first two are really just the same),witches,pastafarians,crystal healers, garra ruffa fish therapists and reflexologists.
Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 (iconoclast, militant skeptic and radical atheist)
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 11:12:51 [Permalink]
|
I don't think your points about morality have any bearing on this.
It is a question of liberty, should you be able to control what parents teach their children?
And if you answer "yes", is that even possible to enforce. |
 |
 |
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 12:48:21 [Permalink]
|
I beg to differ .The excuse some religious parents and groups give for their teaching their religion to children is to instill within them a moral code. So I have to disagree with your assertion that my points on morality have nothing to do with it.
As for liberty what about the liberty of the affected children? Surely they have a say in the matter? Sorry of course they don't. Some around the area where I live are as young as six when they first go to the mosque. I have to agree with you on one point and that is the matter of control. I think that's what it is all about.It was St Francis Xavier who said give me the child at seven and I will give you the man :http://arjendu.wordpress.com/2010/01/02/give-me-the-child-until-he-is-seven-and-ill-give-you-the-man/. Here there is a link to the seven up series where I got the quote from.
Best wishes to creationists ,religious fundamentalists, paranoid delusionalists ( sorry the first two are really just the same),witches,pastafarians,crystal healers, garra ruffa fish therapists and reflexologists.
Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 (iconoclast, militant skeptic , radical atheist and resident in a post industrial northern England town- now with its very own shuttle) |
|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 12:54:10 [Permalink]
|
p.s. The question was not about how or should parents be allowed to inflict their belief system on their children.It was whether the act of inflicting one belief system on children should be reclassified as child abuse. Unfortunately you are right their my child of a myhtical deity it would be impossible to enforce and its not something I am advocating.
I think these forums are a little like exam questions it's best to make sure you are responding to the question asked.
Best wishes to creationists ,religious fundamentalists, paranoid delusionalists ( sorry the first two are really just the same),witches,pastafarians,crystal healers, garra ruffa fish therapists and reflexologists.
Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 (iconoclast, militant skeptic , radical atheist and resident in a post industrial northern England town- now with its very own shuttle)
|
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 13:14:22 [Permalink]
|
OK, then regarding morality I would say that I think you need to prove religious upbringing is abuse rather than try to disprove that morality comes from religion - that just shows it to be pointless.
Originally posted by Judge Bromley circa 1612
p.s. The question was not about how or should parents be allowed to inflict their belief system on their children.It was whether the act of inflicting one belief system on children should be reclassified as child abuse.
|
I don't see that there is a real difference. If it was reclassified as child abuse, it would therefore not be allowed. Or are you talking about any adult inflicting a belief system on any child?
I think it would be hard if not impossible to have a child grow to maturity without being exposed to any belief systems, if their parents go to mosque on a friday, do you expect the children to be left at home alone? Maybe a creche in the mosque until they've decided on whether they want to believe or not?
And how would you differentiate between a child absorbing a belief system passively and a child who has had a belief system "inflicted" upon them?
|
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 07/24/2011 13:18:15 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 13:18:37 [Permalink]
|
OFFC wrote: | I think you need to prove religious upbringing is abuse rather than try to disprove that morality comes from religion. |
I agree. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 13:27:19 [Permalink]
|
Yes they are important issues but I'm only espousing what Richard Dawkins has already said many times. How would you feel if children of atheists attended atheist meetings every night after school to undergo atheist lessons? Would that be fine? O fourse they would only be taught the atheist point of view.
Again I think you should read what I actually said.I'm not saying they shouldn't be exposed to different belief systems.That would be just plain silly.
Best wishes to creationists ,religious fundamentalists, paranoid delusionalists ( sorry the first two are really just the same),witches,pastafarians,crystal healers, garra ruffa fish therapists and reflexologists.
Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 (iconoclast, militant skeptic , radical atheist and resident in a post industrial northern England town- now with its very own shuttle now on it's side)
On the contrary my religious friend( if I may call you that) what I am saying i believe it would be better for the child to be exposed to different religious beliefs to see which one, or non at all, which they would prefer. In reality, as you probably already know,what happens is the child in question is taught just one belief system : their parents belief.
I seem to have struck a real sore point here. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 13:43:05 [Permalink]
|
| I seem to have struck a real sore point here. |
What makes you say that?
I'm finding it hard to follow your posts when you put a signature in the middle of them, by the way.
| Yes they are important issues but I'm only espousing what Richard Dawkins has already said many times. How would you feel if children of atheists attended atheist meetings every night after school to undergo atheist lessons? Would that be fine? O fourse they would only be taught the atheist point of view. |
Yes I've read this from the misogynistic, ivory tower, A priori, Atheist Richard Dawkins before.
But this basically does not come down to how I feel about anything. You need to prove that it is child abuse, not make an appeal to emotion.
|
|
|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 13:47:20 [Permalink]
|
Sorry about that I will try to be more carefull next time.
Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 (iconoclast, militant skeptic , radical atheist and resident in a post industrial northern England town- now with its very own shuttle) |
|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 15:24:55 [Permalink]
|
Oh dear everyone's gone quiet. Do you want more proof OFFC. How much more proof does everybody require. Think for some of you I could give proof till the cows come home( whatever that means).
To prove my point that I'm not just attacking Christians please check this out :http://www.islam-watch.org/MuminSalih/child-abuse-islam.htm
Above article found at Islam watch :Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims Child Abuse in Islam by Mumin Salih.
Nevertheless I stand by my original statemnt that religious indoctrination could be reclassified as child abuse not just for the examples I have given but also for that fact that it stultifies young minds into accepting one particular dogma .
Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 (iconoclast, militant skeptic , radical atheist and tired and just about to take a bath and go to bed)
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 16:49:12 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Judge Bromley circa 1612
In the 1st August issue of the Watchtower magazine published by the the Watchtower and Bible tract society of New york ( Jehovah's witnesses) it states "Children need to be taught the truth about God. Where can they learn that truth? From the most respected religious book in the world the Bible."
The Christian courier states :"As a general rule, however, the person who truly believes in God, and who has some sense of the moral principles set forth in the Bible, is a better person. He is less to be feared in the neighborhood, and is more likely to be a savoring influence in his community."http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/411-the-connection-between-religion-and-morality
Other authors disagree Marc Hauser and Pete Singer disagree:
http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/publications/recent/HauserSingerMoralRelig05.pdf
Other authors point to the fact that animals in nature don't dreive their moral behaviour to their fellow creatures through belief in a deity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality_without_religion
My own belief is that if religion is taught it should be to teach all belief systems, including atheism and agnosticism, without indoctinating a child in any particular one. That way when a child grows up she or he can make a better informed decision as to what they believe.
What do other subscribers to this forum think? Should religious indoctrination of children be reclassified as child abuse?
Best wishes to religious fundamentalists, paranoid delusionalists ( sorry the first two are really just the same),witches,pastafarians,crystal healers, garra ruffa fish therapists and reflexologists.
Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 (iconoclast, militant skeptic and radical atheist)
|
I think you are committing a generalization fallacy.
While the Watchtower only caters to a very small sub-sect of Christianity (some other sub-sects disagree with the grouping, but they do use the Bible as a base document). Other religions and sub-sects do not have such extremist views.
It is just fine for children to be exposed to the religion of their families. It is up to the child to actively seek out knowledge of the others. I think that a comparative religion class (optional for the extremists) would do some good so that people may understand where an adherent is coming from. Understanding acts as more of a deterrent to extremism as isolation does.
But that's just the opinion of this old Witch. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 16:54:37 [Permalink]
|
I'm afraid you've jumped the shark on this one.
You start with the premise that indoctorination in religion may be child abuse (ala Dawkins) and then jump to the abuses of some of the administrative arms of churches.
Child predators will seek out whatever job will place them in a position of authority over children so that they can abuse it. We could exchange stories about child sexual assault committed by teachers as well.
Some churches have tried covering up child abuse within their ranks. Others have cooperated with police to remove dangerous child predators from the pulpit.
Again, generalization fallacies. It does not help your position. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Hal
Skeptic Friend
USA
302 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 18:06:09 [Permalink]
|
Yes, definitely over-generalizing. I get that you're being deliberately provocative, but there's really no excuse for sloppy rhetoric when addressing such a serious issue as child abuse. Even if you were to simply reduce your assertion to, "religious indoctrination of children is a bad thing," you still need to define "religious indoctrination" for us, and perhaps differentiate it from cultural, political, or other forms of indoctrination. I honestly have no idea, for example, if you consider any-and-all religious education to be the same as abusive indoctrination.
BTW -- misguided and self-congratulatory statements, like "I seem to have struck a sore point here," make me not want to play.
|
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.
 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 19:05:36 [Permalink]
|
Hal wrote: | BTW -- misguided and self-congratulatory statements, like "I seem to have struck a sore point here," make me not want to play. |
Ditto. Although the over-generalizations make me want to play even less. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 20:34:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
You need to prove that it is child abuse... |
What an awesome challenge. "Prove a particular moral point to be true." How would one even begin to go about doing that? As soon as one assumes a particular ethic, proof goes out the window because there's no objective reason to hold to one ethic in preference to another.
An evidentialist would say that faith, since it relies on no evidence whatsoever, is morally "bad." Indoctrinating children into a faith is doubly "bad," because children can't consent to share in your already bad behavior.
Does this immorality rise to the level of "child abuse?" That's a different question, and hard to answer. There's lots of stuff that parents can legally do to their kids that I wouldn't do to mine (or anyone else's), like publicly berating them for failing to get straight As.
The "not allowed" thing is just a distraction, by the way. As a society, we discourage many behaviors without them being prohibited. The more general argument is whether religion itself should be communally shunned, in part because of the effects of indoctrination of children. Nobody needs to petition their government representatives to pass legislation for this shunning to begin. People still have a right to teach their kids badly, but it's one of those rights that should be exercised with shame, not pride. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Religious indoctrination of children child abuse?
