Why making your children follow your religion truly is brainwashing

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Communist atheist propaganda in Russia Romania led to jailing of Christians, torture and murder. They targeted Christians. They took their children from them and raised them by atheists. They were told over and over again that there is no G--. They drugged them as prisoners, Christians and believers that is, beat them, raped them, smashed the front teeth out of women. Atheists targeted believers.

It had little to do with traditional religion I think.

Sounds a whole lot like the countless massacres and forced conversions perpetrated by Christians against other Christians through the ages. My point still stands: they borrowed tactics from religion that are anathema to freethought and humanism.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Sounds a whole lot like the countless massacres and forced conversions perpetrated by Christians against other Christians through the ages. My point still stands: they borrowed tactics from religion that are anathema to freethought and humanism.

So we can agree then.....both sides are as bad as one another

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So we can agree then.....both sides are as bad as one another

What "both sides"? There are many:

- religion that respects freedom of belief and conscience, including that of children
- religion that disrespects this
- non-theistic approaches that respect this
- non-theistic approaches that disrespect this

All I'm arguing for is for parents to respect their children and to act accordingly. This can be done in a religious setting - and I think what metis described is a good example of this - but I also recognize that many religious upbringings *don't* include this respect, including many mainstream ones.

 

[Nakosis]

Who's forcing religion on their kids?
Forcing implies the kid is already rejecting/resisting the belief which will lead to rebellion in their teens anyway. If a parent has to force religious belief then the non-believer has already won the battle.

I have a friend who was raised a Christian. They question everything except their core religious beliefs. So what? They have as much success in life as the next person. They teach their their children their beliefs. Their children may or may not accept these beliefs. If they do I really don't see where that is going to cause them much of a problem.

The problem doesn't seem to be religion. The problem seems to be child abuse. Child abuse is child abuse. No one with any compassion supports it.

However you can't just hold up religion and call it child abuse.

 

[Magic Man]

So we can agree then.....both sides are as bad as one another

I think you're breaking down the sides wrong. The two sides are:

1) Those who indoctrinate their children.

2) Those who don't.

Being part of the second group is better in my opinion. Religious indoctrination is the most common kind because religion is so popular and generally is passed on through that method. But both groups include both religious people and non-religious people. It's not an "atheists vs. Christians" debate, even though the thread specifies religious indoctrination.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I think you're breaking down the sides wrong. The two sides are:

1) Those who indoctrinate their children.

2) Those who don't.

Being part of the second group is better in my opinion. Religious indoctrination is the most common kind because religion is so popular and generally is passed on through that method. But both groups include both religious people and non-religious people. It's not an "atheists vs. Christians" debate, even though the thread specifies religious indoctrination.

One may teach something 'hands on' or in a totally passive way. The passive way is easy if you want them to follow the world, it is right in front of you! What is the difference. You don't point something out, why? Because you don't want them to know

 

[Magic Man]

Who's forcing religion on their kids?

Anyone who teaches their child that their religion is true from the time they can understand words.

Forcing implies the kid is already rejecting/resisting the belief which will lead to rebellion in their teens anyway. If a parent has to force religious belief then the non-believer has already won the battle.

It doesn't imply that at all. Teaching a child about different religious beliefs is providing them with info. Telling a child your religious beliefs are true (and therefore others are false) is forcing your beliefs on them.

I have a friend who was raised a Christian. They question everything except their core religious beliefs. So what? They have as much success in life as the next person. They teach their their children their beliefs. Their children may or may not accept these beliefs. If they do I really don't see where that is going to cause them much of a problem.

You don't see a problem with imposing beliefs on a child before they can really question them, so that they never have a chance to make an unbiased decision about the beliefs?

I think the problem comes in when it's compared to other things. Obvious, imposing your religion on your kids isn't as bad as physically abusing them. But that doesn't mean it's not still wrong. Besides, you can make the same case for physical abuse as you did here for religious indoctrination. "They have as much success as the next person (who wasn't abused)."

The problem doesn't seem to be religion. The problem seems to be child abuse. Child abuse is child abuse. No one with any compassion supports it.

However you can't just hold up religion and call it child abuse.

Whether or not it's technically child abuse, it's still indoctrination, and that's still bad.

 

[Nakosis]

Anyone who teaches their child that their religion is true from the time they can understand words.

It's what the parents believe is true. Would you rather they teach what you believe is true instead. Or should maybe they teach that nothing is true? There's nothing to believe in?

It doesn't imply that at all. Teaching a child about different religious beliefs is providing them with info. Telling a child your religious beliefs are true (and therefore others are false) is forcing your beliefs on them.

No it is not "forcing". You are just implying it is in an effort to support your case. You are trying an appeal to emotions by using the term. If you want to equivocate the term them teaching them right from wrong is forcing their beliefs.

You don't see a problem with imposing beliefs on a child before they can really question them, so that they never have a chance to make an unbiased decision about the beliefs?

Kids never have a chance to make an unbiased decision. Everyone is biased. Everyone grows up biased. What does this have to do with religion?

I think the problem comes in when it's compared to other things. Obvious, imposing your religion on your kids isn't as bad as physically abusing them. But that doesn't mean it's not still wrong. Besides, you can make the same case for physical abuse as you did here for religious indoctrination. "They have as much success as the next person (who wasn't abused)."

No you can't. You can't compare a parent teaching a child their religions beliefs with physical abuse.

Whether or not it's technically child abuse, it's still indoctrination, and that's still bad.

No, when you send kids to school it is they are being indoctrinated with ideas and concepts they need to live in society. At an early age they are not taught to question everything. They are taught to accept the rules and get punished if they do not.

You are trying to vilify what is common and accepted practice just because you don't agree with the belief of the parents. Fortunately no one is requiring you to teach your children their beliefs. You have the freedom to teach your children what you believe to be true.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Who's forcing religion on their kids?

Lots of people.

Forcing implies the kid is already rejecting/resisting the belief which will lead to rebellion in their teens anyway.

No, it doesn't.

I have a friend who was raised a Christian. They question everything except their core religious beliefs. So what? They have as much success in life as the next person. They teach their their children their beliefs. Their children may or may not accept these beliefs. If they do I really don't see where that is going to cause them much of a problem.

That depends on what they have to do to their kids to get them to accept those beliefs. Sometimes it's easy; sometimes it's hard... and the child can suffer in the process.

Also, problems can arise when the indoctrination doesn't take. When the parents make particular religious beliefs mandatory to be part of the family but the child ends up not accepting those beliefs, then shunning or other harmful practices can result.

... or the child just learns to put on a front of belief and stay in the closet, so the child ends up emotionally and psychologically unfulfilled, all the while feeling like his parents wouldn't love his "real" self if he let them see it.

Do you really not see a problem in any of this?

 

[Magic Man]

It's what the parents believe is true. Would you rather they teach what you believe is true instead. Or should maybe they teach that nothing is true? There's nothing to believe in?

Maybe the should teach that it's what they believe, but there are a lot of other very different beliefs on the same subject.

No it is not "forcing". You are just implying it is in an effort to support your case. You are trying an appeal to emotions by using the term. If you want to equivocate the term them teaching them right from wrong is forcing their beliefs.

No, it's forcing. They aren't giving the child information for them to consider and then form a conclusion. They are telling the child that it's true. Whether or not you like the term "forcing", it fits this situation.

Kids never have a chance to make an unbiased decision. Everyone is biased. Everyone grows up biased. What does this have to do with religion?

All the more reason to not intentionally cause particular biases when it's unnecessary.

No you can't. You can't compare a parent teaching a child their religions beliefs with physical abuse.

Hmmm I'd prefer you actually read my comments before responding.

No, when you send kids to school it is they are being indoctrinated with ideas and concepts they need to live in society. At an early age they are not taught to question everything. They are taught to accept the rules and get punished if they do not.

This is often the case. Are you implying that I'm supporting that method? Because I'm not.

You are trying to vilify what is common and accepted practice just because you don't agree with the belief of the parents. Fortunately no one is requiring you to teach your children their beliefs. You have the freedom to teach your children what you believe to be true.

I'm disagreeing with a common and accepted practice because I don't agree with the practice. I don't agree with teaching kids anything just because you say so. I don't expect my kids to accept evolution because I teach it to them as truth from the time they're babies. I expect them to learn about it when they're ready and accept the overwhelming evidence for it.

And just to point out a double standard. You condemned my use of "forcing" as an appeal to emotion, when that's all your use of "common and accepted" is. At one time it was common and accepted to own slaves. That's not a good enough reason to continue agreeing with a tradition.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I believe the basic issue with Pangwan is he thinks children have rights that trump parental rights.

Let's not get too extreme and talk about abuse unless you believe taking your children to church is abuse.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I believe people make too big a deal out of this, most children rebell which is why Atheist parents may well raise a preacher or religious parents may have an Athesist young adult.

 

[Magic Man]

I believe people make too big a deal out of this, most children rebell which is why Atheist parents may well raise a preacher or religious parents may have an Athesist young adult.

I don't know about that. Kids do rebel, but the extent of the rebellion is proportional to the extent of the imposition. The more you try to force things on kids, the more they rebel. If you tend not to force things on them, they won't rebel as much. Unless those atheist parents are forcing atheism on the kid, I don't see the kid reacting to it that much. I'm sure there are situations like that, but I'm also sure they're rare.

I think religious parents ending up with atheist young adults is much more likely, especially these days.

 

[oldbadger]

I think religious parents ending up with atheist young adults is much more likely, especially these days.

........thus showing that their children were never imprinted with their parent's religions?

 

[Magic Man]

........thus showing that their children were never imprinted with their parent's religions?

Nope. As I've already gone over, the fact that some children are able to break free from the indoctrination doesn't mean it wasn't indoctrination or that it wasn't bad.

 

[Nakosis]

Maybe the should teach that it's what they believe, but there are a lot of other very different beliefs on the same subject.

I'm fine with you teaching your kids as you see fit as long as you are not breaking any laws. I think you should teach your kid in the manner you deem appropriate. I don't have a problem with others doing the same.

No, it's forcing. They aren't giving the child information for them to consider and then form a conclusion. They are telling the child that it's true. Whether or not you like the term "forcing", it fits this situation.

Ok, I still think you are using the term for it's emotional effect.

All the more reason to not intentionally cause particular biases when it's unnecessary.

If not you children will get their bias from somewhere. You'd rather trust in fate?

Hmmm I'd prefer you actually read my comments before responding.

Yes I read your comment. You said if wasn't the same but went ahead and made the comparison anyway.

This is often the case. Are you implying that I'm supporting that method? Because I'm not.

No, I'm saying the method works well enough. You may see flaws, other methods may or may not be better. However all methods of teaching have flaws. You see more negative then positive. I don't think the negatives are dramatic enough to worry about.

I'm disagreeing with a common and accepted practice because I don't agree with the practice. I don't agree with teaching kids anything just because you say so. I don't expect my kids to accept evolution because I teach it to them as truth from the time they're babies. I expect them to learn about it when they're ready and accept the overwhelming evidence for it.

It's your right to voice your opposition. Me I have an opposition to people going about telling other parents they know better how to raise their kids.

And just to point out a double standard. You condemned my use of "forcing" as an appeal to emotion, when that's all your use of "common and accepted" is. At one time it was common and accepted to own slaves. That's not a good enough reason to continue agreeing with a tradition.

Yes it was morally acceptable among the masses to own slaves. Now you have a new and improved morality that you feel everyone should accept? Based on what? I'd suspect them slaves owner thought everyone should agree with their moral standards as well.

 

[Magic Man]

I'm fine with you teaching your kids as you see fit as long as you are not breaking any laws. I think you should teach your kid in the manner you deem appropriate. I don't have a problem with others doing the same.

Really? You never have a problem with other parents teaching how they see fit?

You're responding to the wrong argument here. No one is trying to stop people from teaching their kids as they see fit. The disagreement is over what are good ways to teach your kids and what are bad ways.

Ok, I still think you are using the term for it's emotional effect.

And I'm still using it for its accuracy.

If not you children will get their bias from somewhere. You'd rather trust in fate?

I don't understand. I'm obviously going to teach my kids; I'm just not going to teach them the same way someone teaches children their religion. Mostly I'm going to teach them how to think critically.

No, I'm saying the method works well enough. You may see flaws, other methods may or may not be better. However all methods of teaching have flaws. You see more negative then positive. I don't think the negatives are dramatic enough to worry about.

You don't see indoctrination as more negative than positive? You have no reservations about parents imposing beliefs on kids rather than letting them decide for themselves?

It's your right to voice your opposition. Me I have an opposition to people going about telling other parents they know better how to raise their kids.

Correction: You have an opposition to people going about telling other parents they know better how to raise their kids in some cases but not others. Unless you don't have an opposition to telling parents you know better when it comes to beating them or not getting them medical help.

See, the issue is not that some people feel it's OK to tell other parents how to parent and other people don't feel that way. The issue is which particular methods of parenting people feel comfortable expressing an opinion on. I'm pretty sure we all agree that it's OK to say that parents who let their children die or suffer because they choose prayer over medical attention are parenting poorly. Essentially, with a lot of parenting, I agree we should just let parents do their thing without criticizing because we aren't in their shoes. I just disagree that teaching religion is one of those times.

Yes it was morally acceptable among the masses to own slaves. Now you have a new and improved morality that you feel everyone should accept? Based on what? I'd suspect them slaves owner thought everyone should agree with their moral standards as well.

1) You seem to have missed the point. The point was that categorizing something as "common and accepted" is not a good way to go about making an argument for it. Those qualities don't mean the thing is necessarily good.

2) Are you saying people should own slaves, if that's what they feel is right?

 

[Nakosis]

Lots of people.

Ok, kids are being forced to learn their ABCs. OMG the humanity...

You want to keep using the word forced, it's seriously loosing it's impact.

No, it doesn't.

Ok, parents, teachers and society are "forcing" kids to learn stuff. Not a big deal really.

That depends on what they have to do to their kids to get them to accept those beliefs. Sometimes it's easy; sometimes it's hard... and the child can suffer in the process.

Yeah, my step father used to punch me in the head when he got angry. Thank God he never tried to make me go to church as well.

No parent is perfect. Hopefully parents will treat their children with respect. However life usually won't so maybe it will make them tougher. In any case it's not about the religion.

Also, problems can arise when the indoctrination doesn't take. When the parents make particular religious beliefs mandatory to be part of the family but the child ends up not accepting those beliefs, then shunning or other harmful practices can result.

Yes tell me about it. So many parent teachers conferences. "Your son is disrupting class by constantly questioning the teacher." Military too. My son would tell his superior their orders were stupid. Yeah he got shunned, punished, laughed at, they tried to embarrass him whenever they could. Fortunately he had a tough upbringing and was able to handle whatever they threw at him.

If there had been less conflict in his earlier life I suspect he'd of had a much more difficult time of it.

... or the child just learns to put on a front of belief and stay in the closet, so the child ends up emotionally and psychologically unfulfilled, all the while feeling like his parents wouldn't love his "real" self if he let them see it.

Do you really not see a problem in any of this?

I see human nature in all of this, but it's still not about the religion.

 

[Magic Man]

Ok, kids are being forced to learn their ABCs. OMG the humanity...

Nice try, but no. Learning to communicate with other people is a lot different than having personal beliefs imposed on you.

You want to keep using the word forced, it's seriously loosing it's impact.

No, it's not.

Ok, parents, teachers and society are "forcing" kids to learn stuff. Not a big deal really.

True. Forcing them to learn stuff is not a big deal. Forcing them to believe stuff is a big deal.

I see human nature in all of this, but it's still not about the religion.

In this case we're talking about religious indoctrination because it's the most common and accepted form (), but the idea is that indoctrination is bad. It's just that with religion it's called "teaching children the religion".

 

[Nakosis]

Really? You never have a problem with other parents teaching how they see fit?

You're responding to the wrong argument here. No one is trying to stop people from teaching their kids as they see fit. The disagreement is over what are good ways to teach your kids and what are bad ways.

Really? Again?... It's ok for a parent to teach their kids in the manner they feel is appropriate as long as you feel it is appropriate. Otherwise it is not appropriate.
Your position is becoming very confusing.

My position is simple. As long as the parent isn't breaking the law which we as a society have agree to. You feel you know better. So does every parent. Why should they listen to you? And, if they did agree, it shouldn't be a problem to get the laws changed. You feel it's morally wrong. Ok, other parents don't have the same morality you do. Or, again, if they did, it shouldn't be too hard to gets laws passed.

And I'm still using it for its accuracy.

Fine, I'm just cautioning people to be aware of the emotional equivocation being used.

I don't understand. I'm obviously going to teach my kids; I'm just not going to teach them the same way someone teaches children their religion. Mostly I'm going to teach them how to think critically.

Sure in a way that you feel is appropriate. That doesn't necessarily mean they are going to have a better or happier life because of it.

I remember a story about a guy who decided to raise a genius. Only allow her to listen to classical music. Taught her mathematics, science, critical thinking. It worked. Ended up with an IQ of around 210? Not sure but pretty high.
Anyway she grew up miserable. Overweight, no friends but she was very smart. Who knows, teach her a little religion she might have ended up with a better support group. Still I'm sure the parent did what he thought was best.

You don't see indoctrination as more negative than positive? You have no reservations about parents imposing beliefs on kids rather than letting them decide for themselves?

Not if they want to be a soldier. Maybe if I could foresee the future. I'd know what were the correct choices for my kids. I don't and I don't believe you do either but I'm doing the best I can. I don't think it's my place to be telling other parents how they should be raising their kids. I hope it works out for the best but I don't have a crystal ball. Do you?

Correction: You have an opposition to people going about telling other parents they know better how to raise their kids in some cases but not others. Unless you don't have an opposition to telling parents you know better when it comes to beating them or not getting them medical help.

No, I would take what I felt is appropriate action according to my morals when faced with such circumstances. Has nothing to do with telling them how to or not to raise their kids. Has to do with me and my morals and my actions to protect the kid in a manner I saw fit. That's not because I view my morals as better. It's because I act according to my morality.

See, the issue is not that some people feel it's OK to tell other parents how to parent and other people don't feel that way. The issue is which particular methods of parenting people feel comfortable expressing an opinion on. I'm pretty sure we all agree that it's OK to say that parents who let their children die or suffer because they choose prayer over medical attention are parenting poorly. Essentially, with a lot of parenting, I agree we should just let parents do their thing without criticizing because we aren't in their shoes. I just disagree that teaching religion is one of those times.

Ok, I see no reason to concern myself with the religious belief of others. If a child believes and they are happy with it, great. If they are not happy, and there are a whole lot of things to not be happy about, of which religion seems fairly minor, hopefully they can see their way to changing things.

I know people have told me they had parents who they claimed used their religion to abuse them. However I don't believe in denying the rights of a parent because of those that few abuse their rights. You need to deal with the individual, not everyone who happens to profess the same religious belief.

1) You seem to have missed the point. The point was that categorizing something as "common and accepted" is not a good way to go about making an argument for it. Those qualities don't mean the thing is necessarily good.

2) Are you saying people should own slaves, if that's what they feel is right?

What I'm saying is that what people feel is right is not based on objective morality. They felt as morally right as you do now. In the future, society may find your morality reprehensible and condemn you for it. You cannot use your own feelings as an objective gauge for morality.